Delhi High Court
Sajjad Khan & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 July, 2016
Author: G.S.Sistani
Bench: G.S.Sistani, I.S. Mehta
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment Dated: 08th July, 2016
+ W.P.(C) 1233/2016
SAJJAD KHAN & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Ms. Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Amandeep Joshi, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr.
Mimansak Bhardwaj, Advocate for
UOI along with Mr. K. Ganesh, DO,
cao/cp Cell and Mr. S.K. Karn, DD
Legal, CAO.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)
1. The matter is taken up today as the 7th July, 2016 was declared holiday on account of Id-ul-Fitr.
2. Notice to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted. Mr. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice.
3. At the outset, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that although the Central Administrative Tribunal by an order dated 04.12.2015 has allowed the OA and quashed the impugned order dated 07.01.2013, however, the petitioners are aggrieved by the observations made by the Tribunal in paras 23 and 24 of the judgment.
W.P.(C).1233/2016 Page 1 of 44. The facts which led to the filing of the OA as noticed by the Tribunal are as under:
"The applicants in this case are members of the Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Service (AFHQCS). The Armed Forces Civil Service Members are initially recruited as Assistant Group „B‟ in PB-2. Thereafter, the next level is Section Officer (SO) Group „B‟ in PB-2 with Grade Pay Rs.4800/-. The induction as SO is 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion.
2. The Department of Personnel and Training (DoP&T) vide OM dated 24.04.2009, consequent upon acceptance of recommendations of 6th Pay Commission, provided for non- functional upgradation(NFU) for officers of Organized Group „A‟ services in PB-3 and PB-4. The basic provision is quoted below:
"(i) Whenever an Indian Administrative Services Officer of the State of Joint Cadre is posted at the Centre to a particular grade carrying a specific grade pay in Pay Band 3 of Pay Band 4, the officers belonging to batches of Organized Group A Services that are senior by two years or more and have not so far been promoted to that particular grade would be granted the same grade on non-functinal basis from the date of posting of the Indian Administrative Service Officers in that particular grade at the Centre."
3. From a close reading of the aforesaid provision, it would appear that the benefit of NFU could be extended only to the Members of organized Group „A‟ service when a Member of Indian Administrative Service of the State or Joint Cadre is posted to the Centre in the Grade Pay in Pay Band 3 or Pay Band 4, if the officer belonging to Organized Group „A‟ service is senior to him by two years, with effect from the date when such Indian Administrative Service Officer is posted in the particular grade at the Centre. Thus, to invoke the aforesaid provisions or, in other words, to get the aforesaid benefit, two conditions are to be satisfied, viz., (i) the officer claiming benefit of NFU is member of organized Group „A‟ service, and
(ii) if an officer belonging to Indian Administratrive Service junior to him by two years, is posted in that particular grade at the Centre, on which such member of organized Group „A‟ W.P.(C).1233/2016 Page 2 of 4 service is working.
4. The grievance of the applicants is that the benefit of this OM is not being granted to the members of the Service. This matter had been examined by the government and Ministry of Defence in their reply dated 7.01.2013 to the AFHQCS Officers Association rejecting their plea as follows:
"2. The proposal for grant of Non-functional Upgradation under the DOP&T OM dated 24.4.2009 to the office of AFHQ CS officer was taken up with DOP&T for their consideration twice in Feb 2010 and thereafter in June 2010. DOP&T have not agreed to the proposal stating that "the instructions for grant of Non-functional Upgradation issued in pursuance of the recommendations of the 6th CPC and are applicable to Organized Group „A‟ Officers. The proposal of extending the same for AFHQ Civil Service cannot be agreed to as the same will give rise to demand from other services also."
5. Mr. Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits, on instructions, that in the absence of particulars furnished by the petitioners, the Tribunal has correctly rejected their claim for grant of Non-Functional Upgradation(NFU). Ms. Jyoti Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that no particulars could have been provided as the stage for providing such particulars had not arisen. Mr.Bhardwaj contends that the respondents will consider the case of each petitioner individually, subject however to the conditions as laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 24.04.2009 and subject to the petitioners furnishing necessary particulars.
6. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following agreed terms:
i) The respondents shall consider the case of each petitioner unaffected by the observations made by the Tribunal in paras 23 and 24 of the order dated 04.12.2015;W.P.(C).1233/2016 Page 3 of 4
ii) The petitioners will provide necessary information within a period of four weeks to the respondents; and
iii) The respondents will apply the Office Memorandum dated 24.04.2009 as pointed out by Mr. Bhardwaj and will consider each case of the petitioner individually and thereafter pass a reasoned order within a period of 10 weeks and such order shall be subject to the outcome of the SLP No.35548-35554/2015 titled Union of India and Ors. Etc. v. G.J. Singh and Ors. Etc., pending in the Supreme Court of India.
7. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
8. Copy of the order be given Dasti to the counsel for the parties.
G.S.SISTANI, J I.S. MEHTA, J JULY 08, 2016 pst W.P.(C).1233/2016 Page 4 of 4