Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Bhagat vs Union Of India Through on 23 February, 2010
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH O.A. No.2889 of 2009 M.A.No.1978 of 2009 New Delhi, on this 23rd day of February 2010 Honble Shri N.D. Dayal, Member (A) Honble Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J) 1. Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Bhagat son of Late Shri Baijnath Bhagat, aged 43 years, working as D P A Grade-B, Directorate of M I S, Air Head Quarter, Wing 7, IInd Floor, West Block-6, Sector-1, R K Puram, New Delhi-110066. 2. Mr. N K Talukdar, son of Shri Rajendra Nath Talukdar, aged about 34 years, working as Data Processing Assistant Grade B, Directorate of PC/PC-4, Air Head Qurter, Vayu Bhawan, Room No.190F, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110006. .Applicants. (By Advocate: Ms. Seema Panchal for Shri P.K. Sharma) versus Union of India through 1. The Secretary, Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi. 3. Joint Secretary & Chief Administrative Officer, Ministry of Defence, C-II, Hutments South Block, New Delhi. .Respondents. (By Advocate : Shri Rajiv Manglik for Shri R.P. Aggarwal) ORDER (ORAL) Shri N.D. Dayal, Member (A) :
Upon hearing the learned counsel it transpires that the pay scale that has been fixed and by which the applicants are aggrieved is based upon Government acceptance of recommendations of the VIth CPC and these have been promulgated by the CSRP Rules, 2008 which are statutory rules. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the regular counsel is in personal difficulty today. Learned counsel for the respondents states that any prayer which seeks to contest the pay scales published under the CSRP Rules, 2008 must in the first instance be made to the Government itself which has set up an Anomaly Committee departmentally as well as at national level. On the one hand the recommendations were made by an expert body and on the other the administration is competent to accept/modify the recommendations and implement the same. Since the Government has provided a forum to look into such like representations from employees, it would only be appropriate that in the first instance the matter be taken up with the administration in accordance with the procedure already laid down for the purpose.
2. In view of such submission, we are not inclined to detain this matter which is disposed of without going into merits by giving liberty to the applicants to approach the appropriate forum which appears to be the Anomaly Committee within a period of six weeks and upon receipt of such representation, let a decision be taken and applicants informed within a reasonable period of time.
3. OA is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
(Dr. DHARAM PAUL SHARMA) (N.D. DAYAL)
Member (J) Member (A)
/ravi/