S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Diary No(s). 23663/2017
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-03-2017 in WP No. 2634/2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi)
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SOMVIR RANA (TGT ENG) & ORS. Respondent(s)
(WITH APPLN(S) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP-IA
No.77457/2017)WITH DIARY NO.23440/2017 (XIV)(WITH APPLN(S) FOR IA No.78434/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF)
Date : 01-09-2017
These petitions were called on for hearing today.
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
We find that there are several matters in which the aggrieved employees have been going to the Tribunal, then to the High Court and thereafter those matters are brought before this Court at the instance of the Union of India/NCT of Delhi. Once the question, in principle, has been settled, it is only appropriate on the part of the Government of India to issue a Circular so that it will save the time of the Court and the Administrative Departments apart from avoiding unnecessary and avoidable expenditure. The present situation is that the stepping up is available only to those who have approached the Court. But since the issue has otherwise become final, we direct the Government of India to immediately look into the matter and issue appropriate orders for granting the pay-scale so that people need not unnecessarily travel either to the Tribunal or the High Court or this Court.
With the above observations and directions, the special leave petitions are dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (RENU DIWAN)
COURT MASTER ASST. REGISTRAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) 2634/2017, CM APPL 11450/2017
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & AN...Versus SOMVIR RANA & ORS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
ORDER 23.03.2017
The impugned order dated 04.04.2016 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short), allows the OA
No.3217/2009, filed by the promotee Trained Graduate Teachers, who are the
respondents before us.
2. Respondents were promoted as Trained Graduate Teachers before or after
01.01.2006.
3. The question raised and answered in favour of the respondents by the
Tribunal relates to fixation of their pay under the Central Civil Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 (Rules for short) and whether there can be two
pay scales for the same post of Trained Graduate Treachers, one for
promotees and the other for direct recruits.
2. The petitioners herein had applied Rule 7, which postulates multiplying the
pre-revised basic pay with 1.86 factor and Rule 13, which provides for
granting one increment equal to 3% of the pay band and pay being rounded
off to the next multiplier of 10. As far as new direct appointees are concerned,
they are given benefit of entry-level pay indicated in Section II of Part-A of
the First Schedule of the Rules. The entry-level pay of direct appointee
Trained Graduate Teachers was higher than the pay scale of the respondents
fixed under Rule 7 read with Rule 13 of the Rules.
4.This anomaly was noticed by the petitioners themselves, who had
issued clarification dated 13.03.2009, which reads as under:
“I am directed to say that matter relating to stepping up of
pay of Seniors with the directly recruited juniors, recruited on or
Central Pay Commission was taken up with Deptt. of Expenditure
Ministry of Finance. It has been decided that stepping up of pay of
seniors will be permitted with reference to their directly
recruited juniors who are recruited on or after 01.01.2006 and
whose basic pay is more than that of the seniors subject to the
following conditions:-
(a) Stepping up the basic pay of seniors under the above
provisions can be claimed only in the case of those
cadres which have an element of direct recruitment
and cases where a directly recruited junior actually
drawing more basic pay than the seniors. In such
cases, the basic pay of the seniors will be stepped up
(b) Using the above provision, Government servants
cannot claim stepping up their revised basic pay with
reference to entry pay in the revised pay structure for
direct recruits appointed on or after 1.1.2006 as laid
down in Section-II of part A of First Schedule to the
CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, if their cadre does not have
any element of directed recruitment or in cases, where
no junior is drawing basic pay higher than them.
(c) Stepping up of pay of the seniors in accordance with
the above provisions shall not be applicable in cases
where direct recruits have been granted advance
increments at the time of recruitment.
2.This issues with the approval of the Ministry Finance
(Department of Expenditure Implementation Cell), Govt. of India.”
5.The above clarification notices that pay scales at the same post in some
cadres in the case of promotees were lower than the pay scales applicable to
the direct recruits. To correct this anomaly, the clarification states that
stepping up of basic pay of the seniors would be permissible in the case of
those cadres
(i) where appointment by way of direct recruit is permissible and
(ii) when direct recruited junior actually draws basic pay more than the
seniors.
6.This clarification has not been accepted by the Tribunal and, in our
opinion, rightly. The anomaly and discrepancy of fixing lower pay scale for
the Constitution. The same post with identical duties and responsibilities, ex
facie cannot have two different pay scales, one for the promotees and the
other for direct recruits. The difficulty in accepting the plea of stepping up in
terms of the clarification dated 13.03.2009, is the second condition that
requires, the direct recruits should have actually joined before any stepping up
of pay can be granted.The date of joining would be different as filling up of
the direct recruitment vacancies in the cadre would depend upon vacancy
position, selection, etc. This is unacceptable as it would be fortuitous and
even whimsical. In any case, the same post cannot have two pay scales one
for the promotee and other for the direct recruit for it violates the principle of “equal pay for equal work.” Stepping up of pay to be granted on satisfaction
of the stipulated conditions would not rectify and undo the discrepancy and
inconsistency inherent when two different pay scales are stipulated for the
same post.
7. When and after initial pay of promotee Trained Graduate Teacher is
fixed in terms of the order of the Tribunal, increment would be calculated and
payable as in cases covered by Section II of Part A of the first schedule of the
Rules as applicable to the direct recruits.
in WP (C) No.8058/2015, Union of India Vs. Malbika Deb Gupta, decided
on 04.11.2006. The writ petition of the Union of India was dismissed after
referring to the rule position and the illustrations given in the Rules.
9. However, we clarify that the dismissal of the writ petition would not
have any bearing and does not amount to acceptance of the contention raised
in some of the OAs, which have been disposed of by the impugned order
wherein the respondent-employees had submitted that the basic revised pay
should be multiplied by the factor of 1.86.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in the present writ
petition and the same is dismissed.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
MARCH 23, 2017
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH-Delhi
0.A. No. 1368/2014 M.A. No. 1169/2014 .New Delhi, this the 8th day of May, 2014
HONDBLE MR. V. ADAY KUMAR, MEMBER (3) HONDBLE MR. V.N. GAUR, MEMBER (A)
Somvir Rana [Tgt (Eng.)and others vs The Chief Secretary Govt, of NCT of Delhi and others
4. Deputy Controller of Accounts, (Education), GNCT of Delhi, Old Secretariat, Delhi. .. Respondents
ORDER (ORAL)
Mr. V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J) Heard the learned counsel for the applicants.
2. MA 1169/2014 filed under Rule 4(s)(a) of C.A.T. (Procedure) Rules, 1987, for joining together, is allowed.
3. The applicants, who are working as Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs) in the Govt, of NCT of Delhi, have filed the present O.A. seeking the following relief:
□i) Issue a direction to the respondents to fix the Initial Basic Pay or Entry Pay as per 6th Central Pay Commission Report from the date of promotion or holding the posts on or after 01.01.2006 and also pay the arrears along with the interest thereon.
ii) Cost of litigation be awarded.
iii) Pass such other orders or direction which the Honorable Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interests and circumstances of the case.
4. It is submitted that the applicants have made number of representations to the respondents requesting them in this regard and one such latest representation dated 25.04.2013 is placed at Annexure A-5, but the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representations
5. In the circumstances, the O.A. is disposed of, at the admission stage itself, without going into the other merits of the case, by directing the Respondents to consider the representations of the applicants and to pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order thereon, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.
(V.N. GAUR) (V. ADAY KUMAR) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (IJ)
-Neeraj Vyas, Chief Operating Officer, SBI