Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Mangal Saren vs Employees State Insurance Corporation on 4 April, 2022
a AANA Sos CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH KOLKATA Date of order: 04.04.2022 Present 'Hon'ble Ms, Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member Hon'ble Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member. 'OA. 720 of 2020 MA. 433 of 2020 OA, 722 af 2020 MA. 435 of 2020 For the Applicant . For the Respondents Mangal Saren & 22 Others. Sunita Dam & 2 Others. 1. S orien Applicant, ~Versus- Union of India through the Secretary fo the Gavt, of . india, Ministry of labour & Employment, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Defhi- 110001. The Director General, Employees State insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi- 110002. The Medical Commissioner, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, CiG Marg, New Delhi- 110002. The Financial Commissioner, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Shawan, CiG Marg, New Delhi- 120002. The Medical Superintendent, ESIC Hospital and ODC (EZ), Joka, Kolkata- 700104. paeevnenes Respondents, > Mr. 8. &. Dutta, Counsel Ms. K. Chakraborty, Counsel ; Mr. S, S. Banerjee, Counsel (In OA. 720 of 20) Mr. S.C. Prasad, Counsel (in OA, 722 af 20}e" ORDER (Oral)
Per Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, JM:
Heard learned counsel for both sides.
2. Due to parity in the nature of grievance, facts pleaded and relief claimed, these cases are being heard out analogously, upon due notice to be disposed of by this common order.
3. For the sake of brevity, OA. No. 720 of 2020 is being delineated and discussed hereunder:
This O.A 720 of 2020 has been preferred to seek the following relief:
"(a) Leave may be granted to move this application jointly under Rule 4(5)(a)
-of the CAT Procedure Rules, 1987.
(b) | An order directing the respondents to grant the applicants the benefits of Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- in PB 1 i.e. Rs. 5200-20200/- from the respective dates when the applicants have been appointed as O.T. Assistants/CSR Assistants with all consequential monetary benefits with interest.
(c) An order directing the respondents to produce/cause production of all relevant records.
(d) To pass such other order or orders, direction or directions as your Lordships may deem fit and proper."
4. At hearing, Mr. S. S. Banerjee, Id. Counsel for respondents submits that although Tapan Barua & ors have asked for benefits of Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- at par with Samaresh Maiti who was granted the benefits with effect from 27.11.2018, the applicants have been extended the benefits of Grade Pay of Rs. . 2800/-, a level higher of Samaresh Maiti vide order dated 17.03.2022 as handed "over today by Id. Counsel for applicants.
5. Ld. Counsel for applicant would submit that similarly circumstanced others were not considered in the light of the said order and would be disposed of batch by batch within a time frame.
6.
8. g.
Mr. $. K. Dutta, Id. Counsel for applicant submits that In OA. 1172 of 2017, this Tribunal in the case of Uttam Sharma & Ors. has directed as under:
"5 The respondents have also indicated that the benefits af the Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- has been allowed to such applicants provisionally subject to the outcome of W.P, No. 9512/2009 filed by the Directorate (Medical) Delhi in Hon'ble High Court of Delhi against the order passed in the aforesaid OAs. °
6. Therefore, there is nothing to Indicate that the present applicants are not identically circumstanced to the said applicants in OAs, 2995/2014 & 2996/2014, we direct the authorities to extend the identical benefits to the present applicants i.e. grant of Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- as extended to such applicants who had approached the Principal Bench in the OAs, but subject to the outcome of W. PLNa.
9512/2009."
Therefore, the identical benefits to be extended to the present 3 applicants subject to the outcome of WPCT No, 9512/2009 as respondents are ' agreed to grant to the benefits to the applicants at par Tapan Barua & ors. Ld. Counsel for applicant would also refer to the decision in O.A. . 2995/2014 along with MA. 2797/2014 and OA. 2996/2014 along with MA. 2798/2014 rendered on 19.04.2016, particularly with reference to para 8, which reads as under:
"8.Since the applicants who are working as OT. Assistants/CSSD/CSR Assistants ore identically placed like the Plaster Assistants and Laboratory Assistants of the respondent-ESIC, and for parity of reasons, we reject the contentions of the respondents and accordingly, allow the OA, The respondents are directed to implement the scale notified vide Resolution dated 30.09.1997, ie. by granting the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/- to the applicants. Nowever, they ore entitled for arrears with effect from the date of filing of the OA, without any interest thereon. The exercise shail be completed within two months fram the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This order is subject to the result of the Writ Petition filed by the respondents against the orders of this Tribunal dated 13.01.2004 in OA. No, 1464/2003 Ashok Kumar & Others v. Union of India and also the Writ Petition No, | 18/2015, filed against the orders dated 19.12.2013 in OA, No, 3227/2011 (8rham Pal & Others v. Union of India). Na casts.
In view of the fact that the respondents are willing to.consider the case on par with other employees who have been granted the Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/-
to 2800/- as per their entitlement. Therefore, respondents to consider the case of the applicants in the light of the said decision and the order passed in the case of Tapan Barua, within a period of 4 months from the date receipt of a copy of this order.
10. M.A. 433/2020 by the applicants under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987, for joint Prosecution is allowed. The applicants are allowed to pursue the remedy jointly. Parties to bear their individual court fees '(postal order/DD). Therefore, the MA is disposed of.
11. Thus, the OA would stand disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, OA. 722/2020 with MA. 435/2020 stands disposed of.
cowed Oe, Xe t a"! 7 | (Nandita Chatterjee) (Bidisha Banerjee) Member (A) Member (J) pd