Supreme Court - Daily Orders
All India Naval Clerks Association vs Union Of India on 27 July, 2022
Bench: M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 29204 of 2019)
ALL INDIA NAVAL CLERKS ASSOCIATION & ORS. ...APPELLANTS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 08-08-2019 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in OP(CAT) No. 1597/2012 (Z), by which the High Court has allowed the said petition preferred by the respondents/Union of India and others and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.314 of 2010, the original applicants have preferred the present appeal.
We have heard Shri Mr. P. S. Sudheer, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the respondents.
The issue involved in the present appeal is in a narrow compass. The dispute is with respect to disparity in the pay scale granted to the appellants as per the 5th Pay Commission Signature Not Verified Natarajan recommendations.
Digitally signed by RDate: 2022.08.01 17:28:19 IST Reason:
The appellants are working as Assistants in the Indian Contd..
- 2 -
Navy and they are claiming parity with the pay scale with that of Assistants in Central Secretariat Service (CSS). It is the case on behalf of the appellants that there was disparity in the pay scale even at the time when the recommendations were made by the 4th Pay Commission. As per the recommendations made by the 4th Pay Commission, the pay scale of CSS Assistants was Rs.1400-2600 and the pay scale of the Assistants in the lower formations like appellants was Rs.1400-2300. Thus, there was disparity in the pay scale of CSS Assistants and the Assistants working in the Indian Navy. The issue was referred to the Commission headed by Justice D. Bhaskaran. The Commission submitted its report and the disparity came to be removed and the Assistants working in the Indian Navy like the appellants were put at par with the CSS Assistants. The Central Government and the Department accepted the Commission’s report and accordingly the Assistants working in the Indian Navy were put in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 at par with CSS Assistants. However, thereafter, when the salary was revised on the basis of the 5th Pay Commission recommendations, again there was disparity in the pay scale. Therefore, the appellants/Assistants in the lower formation working in the Indian Navy approached the Tribunal claiming parity with that of CSS Assistants. The learned Tribunal allowed OA No.314 of 2010 and directed to remove the disparity and grant the pay scale at par with the CSS Contd..
- 3 -
Assistants. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order has set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal on the ground that while making the recommendation as per 5th Pay Commission, the Commission supposed to have again studied the quality and quantity of the working of the Assistants in CSS and other lower formations afresh.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, the original applicants before the Tribunal/Assistants working in the lower formations in the Indian Navy have preferred the present appeal.
Pursuant to the earlier order passed by this Court, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned ASG has produced on record Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission’s report. It is not in dispute and it cannot be disputed that Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission was constituted to consider the issue with respect to the disparity in the pay scale of Assistants in CSS and other lower formations. After detailed study, Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission submitted the report and recommended to remove the disparity and to put the Assistants in other lower formations, more particularly, working in the Indian Navy with that of the Assistants in CSS. The said report came to be accepted by the Union of India.
Therefore, thereafter unless there was any change in circumstances with respect to the quality and quantity of contd..
- 4 -
the work of Assistants in CSS and other lower formations, again there could not have been two different pay scales with respect to the Assistants in CSS and other lower formations. It is fairly conceded and nothing is on record and/or it is not the case on behalf of the Union of India that while making recommendations as per 5th Pay Commission, earlier report of Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission was in fact considered.
In that view of the matter, not to pay the similar pay scale to the appellants/Assistants in other lower formations in the Indian Navy with that of the Assistants in CSS would be clearly discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even the same will go against the report submitted by Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission which was directed to be constituted for the very purpose and Justice D. Bhaskaran Commission submitted its report recommending to remove the disparity and thereafter the Central Government accepted the said report. Therefore, the High Court has committed a grave error. While passing the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has observed that during the 5th Pay Commission, the Commission constituted for that purpose is supposed to have again studied the quality and quantity of the work of Assistants in CSS and other lower formations. However, the High Court has observed the same on surmises and conjectures and without considering the fact that Justice D. Bhaskaran Contd..
- 5 -
Commission was constituted for the specific purpose and the Government accepted the same. The learned Tribunal was right in allowing the O.A. preferred by the appellants herein.
In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, present appeal succeeds. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is hereby quashed and set aside and the judgment and order passed by learned Trial Court is hereby restored. Necessary consequences shall follow. Respective Assistants in Navy/lower formations be paid the arrears accordingly within a period of eight weeks from today.
The present Appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
………………………………………J. [M.R. SHAH] ……………………………………J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA] NEW DELHI JULY 27, 2022 ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.11 SECTION XI-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 29204/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-08-2019 in OP(CAT) No. 1597/2012 (Z) passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam) ALL INDIA NAVAL CLERKS ASSOCIATION & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 27-07-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR Mr. Rishi Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Anne Mathew,Adv.
Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Jose, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Chandra Prakash, Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv. Mr. Pranay Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
(NEETU SACHDEVA) (NISHA TRIPATHI)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(signed order is placed on the file)