Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Anil Kumar vs Union Of India Through The Director ... on 1 September, 2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 060/00893/2015
Date of filing: 24.09.2015
Order reserved on: 29.08.2016
Chandigarh, this the 1st day of September, 2016
CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER (J) &
HONBLE SMT. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
Anil Kumar, son of late Sh. Ram Parkash, aged 61 years, resident of H. No. 1011, Sector 46-B, Chandigarh retired as Controller of Administration, CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments Organization, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh 160030.
.APPLICANT
BY : APPLICANT IN PERSON
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Director General, CSIR, Anusandhan Bhawan, 2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi -110001.
2. Director, CSIR Central Scientific Instruments Organization, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh -160030.
.RESPONDENTS
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI I.S. SIDHU
ORDER
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER(J):-
Applicant Anil Kumar, who retired as Controller of Administration from CSIR- CSIO, Chandigarh (respondent no. 2), has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 claiming the following relief:-
(1) To issue appropriate directions to the respondents to recall the circular dated 29/31.03.2010 (Annexure A-4) vide which DoPT OM dated 14.05.2009 (Annexure A-2) regarding communication of all entries in the APAR for fairness and transparency in public administration was made applicable from the reporting year 2009-10 instead of 2008-09 and circular dated 17.04.2014 (Annexure A-15) vide which DoPT OM dated 13.04.2010 (Annexure A-5) regarding communication of below benchmark grading in ACRs prior to the reporting period 2008-2009 and objective consideration of representation by the competent authority against remarks in the APAR or for upgradation of the final grading has been made applicable from the reporting year 2014-15 instead of the reporting period prior to the period 2008-09 as these are not in conformity with the ruling given by the honble Supreme Court in Dev Dutt Vs. Union of India and Others in Civil Appeal No. 7631 of 2002 and are arbitrary, unfair and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
(2) To issue direction to the respondents to quash the proceedings of the Screening Committee meeting held on 16.09.2014 and 25.09.2014 for financial upgradation to PB-4 Rs.37,400 -67000 GP Rs. 8700/- under MACPS and set aside CSIR OM dated 25.09.2014(Annexure A-19) in respect of the applicant for not granting financial upgradation to him w.e.f.10.05.2012 as his case was considered without communication of below benchmark entries/overall gradings in ACRs/APARs of the reckonable period to him for assessment of his fitness for financial upgradation under MACPs in blatant contravention of DoPT OMs dated 14.05.2009 (Annexure A-2) and 13.04.2010 (Annexure A-5) issued in pursuance of the Honble Supreme Court judgment dated 12.5.2008 in the case of Dev Dutt Vs. Union of India (Civil Appeal No. 7631 of 2002).
(3) To issue direction to CSIR to review the case of the applicant by reconvening the meeting of Screening Committee for grant of financial upgradation in PB-4 Rs.37400-67000 GP Rs. 8700/- under MACPS w.e.f. 10.05.2012 by disposing of applicants representation dated 23.07.2014 against APAR for the year 2010-2011 and ignoring the below benchmark entries and overall gradings in the ACRs/APARs of the reckonable period as the same have not been communicated to him in terms of DoPT OM dated 14.5.2009 (Annexure- 2) and 13.4.2010 (Annexure -5) for the last five years till his retirement on superannuation on 30.9.2014.
(4) Call for the record from the respondents.
(5) Direct the respondents to pay the arrears alongwith interest @ 12% from the due date for financial upgradation under MACPS till the date of payment.
2. We have heard the applicant in person and counsel for respondents and perused the case file.
3. The Applicant had earlier filed O.A. NO. 060/00417/2015. In that O.A., besides seeking regular promotions, the applicant had also claimed the same relief as claimed in the instant O.A. except that in the instant O.A., financial upgradation in Pay Band-IV Rs. 37,400-67000 Grade Pay of Rs. 8700/- under MACPs is claimed for subsequent year i.e. w.e.f. 10.05.2012 whereas in the earlier O.A. No. 060/00417/2015, the applicant had claimed the said upgradation w.e.f. 10.5.2011. Aforesaid O.A. No. 060/00417/2015 filed by the applicant has since been dismissed by this Bench vide order dated 01.03.2016. Review Application No. 060/00022/2016 filed against the said order has also been dismissed by circulation by this Bench vide order dated 12.4.2016. In view thereof, we need not go into facts of the instant O.A. and the contentions advanced on behalf of the parties. The instant O.A. is also liable to dismissal for the same reasons as recorded in order dated 01.03.2016 passed in O.A. No. 060/00417/2015 filed by the same applicant. The said O.A. related to financial upgradation w.e.f. 10.5.2011 whereas the instant O.A. relates to financial upgradation w.e.f. 10.5.2012. However, reasons for denying the same to the applicant w.e.f. 10.5.2012 remain the same as those for denying the same to the applicant w.e.f. 10.5.2011. Same contentions have been raised by the applicant in support of his claim in the instant O.A. as raised in O.A. NO. 060/00417/2015.
4. In view of the aforesaid, the instant O.A. is dismissed. No costs.
(JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL) MEMBER (J) (RAJWANT SANDHU) MEMBER (A) Dated: 01.09.2016 `SK 1 (O.A. No. 060/00893/2015)