CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BANGALORE
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.448/2009
DATED THIS THE.............DAY OF
NOVEMBER, 2011
HON'BLE SMT. LEENA MEHENDALE ... MEMBER(A)
HON'BLE SHR V. AJAY KUMAR .... MEMBER(J)
G.Kothanda
Pani,S/o (late) N.Gopal,
Aged
about 58 years,
Working
as Private Secretary 'B',
O/o
The Director Aeronautical Development
Establishment,
Government of India,
Ministry
of Defence, Defence Research &
Development
Organisation, New Thippasandra,
Bangalore
– 560 075.
Resident
of No.29, 4th Main, Chriscon Avenue,
Lakshamamma
Layout, Dodda Banaswadi,
Bangalore
– 560 043 ....
Applicant
(By Advocate Shri B.Veerabhadra)
Vs.
1.The
Director,
Aeronautical
Development
Establishment,
Government of India,
Ministry
of Defence, Defence Research &
Development
Organisation, New Thippasandra,
Bangalore
– 560 075.
2.The
Scientific Advisor to Raksha Manthri and
Director
General R&D Organisation,
Ministry
of Defence,
DRDO
Bhavan, Rajaji Marg,
New
Delhi – 110 105.
3.The Directorate of Human Resource
Development
Represented
by Director,
'B'
Block, DRDO Bhavan, Rajaji Marg,
New
Delhi – 110 105.
4.The
Secretary,
Department
of Personnel & Training,
Ministry
of Personnel, Personnel Grievances
and
Pension, North Block,
New
Delhi – 110 001.
5.The
Union of India,
Rep.
By its Secretary,
Ministry
of Defence, South Block,
New
Delhi – 110 011 .... Respondents.
(By Advocate Shri S.Prakash Shetty,
ACGSC for R-1 to 4)
O R D E R
Hon'ble
Smt. Leena Mehendale, Member (A) :
This
OA filed on 1.10.2009 is the case of one G. Kothandapani, Private Secretary 'B'
in the Office of the Director, Aeronautical Development Establishment, under
the Ministry of Defence at Bangalore. He
prays for the following reliefs:-
(i)
call
for the relevant records with regard to the action taken on his representations
dated 14.7.2008 (Annexure-A/8), 11.2.2009 (Annexure-A/9) and 8.6.2009
(Annexure-A/10) and on perusal,
(ii)
direct
the respondents to grant the pay in the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500 with grade
pay of Rs.5400/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 in the post of Private Secretary 'B' (i.e.)
the date on which he has completed 4 years in the pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 in
terms of the clarification dated 29.9.2008 (Annexure-A/5) and consequently draw
all benefits with interest as specified by this Tribunal and
(iii)
pass
any other order or direction or any other relief as deemed fit by this Tribunal
in the interest of justice, equity and fairplay in administration.
2 The OA is filed to claim two separate
reliefs, one being, claim of a higher pay band and the other is regarding the
date of taking over the charge. The
applicant narrates that:-
(a) He
was appointed as LDC w.e.f. 10.1.1972, then he was promoted to the post of
Private Secretary 'B' grade and later as Senior Private Secretary in the
pre-revised pay scale of Rs.8000-13500 by order No.DOP/13/62164/SPS/08 dated
15.5.2008 (Annexure A1). The order mentions that seniority of the
above named officer will be fixed on the basis of merit as decided by DPC-I.
The officer may exercise within one month from the date of assuming promotion
his option for fixation of pay in higher post under FR 22(1)(a).
(b) The same promotion order also puts a
condition which is as under:
"3. If
the officer does not assume charge of the higher post within one month of the
above mentioned date, it will be assumed that the officer is not interested in
the promotion and consequently order for his promotion will be cancelled. He will also be debarred for promotion as per
rules. No representation/appeal against
the cancellation will be entertained.
3.
In
response to the above order, the applicant submitted his charge assumption
report claiming to take over charge of the promotional post with efect from
1.6.2008 (document not produced). He
was, however, informed on 10.6.2008 (Annexure-R/2) that
"......The assumption of charge of the higher post
would be from 02/06/2008 since 01/06/2008 was a government holiday. The officer is, therefore, requested to
modify the date accordingly."
Thereafter, he
seems to have made an application to the Respondents on 11.06.2008 (copy not
produced), to which, he received a reply dated 8.7.2008 (Annexure-A/7),
whereby, he was once again advised as below:-
"'a promotee unable to assume charge of higher grade
on the effective date shall reckon his notional seniority in the higher grade
from the date of his selection to that grade for the purpose of counting of
residency period for considering his promotion to the next higher grade. It does not mean that he will start drawing
the pay in the higher grade from the effect date of promotion without actually assuming
the higher post. A promotee shall draw
pay in a higher post only after he has physically assumed the appointment of
higher post'.
2. In your
case, the date of promotion as SPS for purposes of seniority and promotion will
be 01/06/2008 as indicated in the R&D Hqrs., promotion order. Whereas, your date of charge assumption would
be 02/06/2008 as 01/06/2008 was a closed holiday (Sunday) to the Establishment.
3. Your
charge assumption may, therefore, be dated accordingly."
He has once again represented on
14.07.2008 (Annexure-A/8) in the light of Article 60 of CSR. This was followed up by another
representation dated 11.2.2009 (Annexure-A/9).
Here, he has tried to draw similarity of a person whose increment falls
due on a particular day or pay fixation falls on a particular date which are
holidays, then, provided that he has attended the office on the next working
day, his increment or pay fixation is released from an earlier date even if it
happens to be a holiday. Claiming the
same anology, he claims that his date of taking over charge should be reckoned
from 1.6.2008, which was a holiday and not on 2.6.2008 as advised by the
office. Once again, on 8.6.2009
(Annexure-A/10), he has repeated the same request. To this, the respondents have replied on
16.3.2010 (Annexure-R/5) where it has been explained as below:-
"2. .....
It is inherent in the scheme of promotion under flexible complimenting that
assumption of duties of higher post is not involved. However, in the present case under reference,
the promotion is vacancy based. In this
case, as per the guidelines, promotion can be effective from the date the
official assumes the charge of higher post or from the date of meeting of DPC,
whichever is later. Charge of higher
post can not be assumed on a closed holiday.
3.
In
view of the above, the request of the individual for assumption of charge of
SPS with effect from 01 Jun 08 which was a closed holiday is not tenable. The officer may be informed
accordingly."
4.
The
OA also agitates a second issue not directly concerned with the above
issue. The applicant's claim is that he
was posted as Private Secretary 'B' in the pre-revised scale of Rs.7500-12000/-
with effect from 1.1.2002 and completed his 4 years in that grade on
31.12.2005. Thereafter, the VI CPC
recommendation became applicable with effect from 1.1.2006 which is also his
date of promotion in the grade of Private Secretary 'B'. The effect of VI CPC actually became
available sometime in September, 2008 which would give benefit from 1.1.2006. The VI CPC, for the first time, introduced the
concept of different grade pays in the same pay band, and the effect of
increased grade pay would, in a nut-shett, mean a higher take home package.
5. Thus, claims the applicant that,
sometime in September, 2008, the respondents are obliged to fix the pay of the
applicant as on 1.1.2006 having due consideration to his regular incarement
that was due on 1.1.2006 in the grade of Private Secretary 'B' as well as the
effect of VI CPC. The applicant has not
produced any details as to how his pay with effect from 1.1.2006 was actually
fixed in the year 2006, before the effect of VI CPC. We observe that had there been no VI CPC
revision, he would have been entitled to get his next increment in the scale of
Rs.7500-12000/-. The applicant submits
that on 1.1.2006, he was entitled, in view of VI CPC pay scales, to a pay scale
of Rs.8000-13500/- and in addition, to the grade pay of Rs.5400/- with effect
from 1.1.2006.
6.
To
this second claim, the respondents have clarified at Annexure-R/6, dated
16.10.2009, which is a letter issued by the Headquarters of the Ministry of
Defence, to all the Labs and Establishments under them and we quote below the
same:-
"2. The upgradation of pay scales of
categories listed under (a), (b) and (c) were taken up and examined in
consultation with the appropriate authorities several times but not agreed
to.
(a) Upgradation of pay scale of Private
Secretary 'B' from in PB-2 with Grade Pay of Rs.4800 on completion of 4 years
regular service to PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400.
3. In view of the above, in the absence of
any Govt. letter authorizing higher grade pay to these posts, the pay of the
employees in these posts is to be fixed as per the existing Pay Band and Grade
Pay only."
7.
Thus,
referring to the relief prayed in para 8(i), namely, the question of no reply
by the respondents to his representations dated 14.7.2008, 11.2.2009 and
8.6.2009 (Annexures-A/8, A/9 and A/10), we find that on 16.2.2010, i.e., after
the filing of this OA, the respondents have given a suitable reply which the
applicant has not challenged even in the written arguments submitted on
18.2.2011. Even on merit, we find no
need to interfere with this reply given by the respondents.
8.
As
far as prayer at 8(ii) is concerned, this has no relevance to the prayer at
para 8(i). The revision of pay which he
claims on the basis of Annexure-A/5 which is merely a suggestive revision, has
been answered by the respondents by way of their letter ated 16.10.2009
(Annexure-R/6), which clarifies that this revision has not been finally agreed
to. We also note that the pay revision
recommended under Annexure-A/5 would affect many categories of employees, not
just the applicant. But, Annexure-R/6
settles the issue once and for all. We
do not find any justification to interfere with Annexure-R/6.
9.
In
view of the foregoing, the OA is dismissed as being without merits. No order as to costs.
(V. AJAY KUMAR) (LEENA
MEHENDALE)
MEMBER (J) MEMBER (A)
psp.
No comments:
Post a Comment