Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
A B Sastry vs Employees State Insurance Corporation ... on 24 October, 2025
1
OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD
ORIGINAL APPLICATIONS NO.021/00420/2023 & 021/00678/2023
ORDER RESERVED ON 12.09.2025
DATE OF ORDER: 24.10.2025
HON'BLE DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
(OA.No.021/00420/2023)
1. K.Prakasam, S/o. Late K.Bapa Rao
Aged about 73 years, Occ: Assistant Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad
R/o Villa No.8, Amulya Homes, Near G.R.Reddy Nagar
Saket Road, Kapra, Hyderabad-500103.
2. S.Krishna Murthy, S/o. S.V.Narasu
Aged about 66 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o H.No.3-9-226, Flat No.206, Maram's GL Heavens-2
Central Bank Colony, Near Road No.2
L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad-500068.
3. B.Umakanth, S/o Late B.Hariprasad Sarma
Aged about 71 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o Flat No.101, Vijay Swagruha Apartments
M.J.Colony, Street No.1, Moula Ali, Hyderabad-500040.
4. K.Rama Jogaiah, S/o Late K.Brahmananda Rao
Aged about 71 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o H.No.15, Mourya Ranga Prasad Duplex Avenue
Near Kendriya Vihar, Gachi Bowli, Hyderabad-500032.
5. P.Ananda Rao, S/o Late P.Narsaiah
Aged about 76 years, Occ: Assistant Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o H.No.MIGH-I-388/2ND Floor
Phase 1 & 2, 5th Road, KPHB Colony
Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500085.
6. M.Lakshminarayana, S/o M.Balaiah
Aged about 74 years, Occ: Assistant Director (Retd.)
E.S.I.Corporation, Hyderabad.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=
NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD,
Phone=
PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf
aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4
1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=
PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
2
OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
R/o H.No.16-1-187, Saidabad, Hyderabad-500059.
7. S.Venkataratnam, S/o Late S.Venugopala Rao
Aged about 72 years, Occ: Assistant Director (Retd.)
E.S.I.Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o.H.No.1-20-265, Plot No.36, Road No.4
Venkatasai Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Secunderabad-500015.
8. M.A.Hafeez, S/o Late M.A.Jaleel
Aged about 76 years, Occ: Assistant Director/Mgr I (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o H.No.12-2-830/17/4, Alapati Nagar Colony
Mehidipatnam, Hyderabad-500028.
9. B.Gnanakumar, S/o Late Sri B.Danaiah
Aged about 66 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o LIGH-235, KPHB Colony, Road No.2
Dhanalakshmi Centre, Hyderabad-500085.
10. B.Balakrishna, S/o Late B.Komaraiah
Aged about 66 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o.H.No.1-57/4/2/A, Plot No.438-A
Sree Ram Nagar Colony, Kondapur-500084.
Ranga Reddy District.
11. T.R.Narasinga Rao, S/o Late T.Ramaiah
Aged about 60 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o 10-4-34/107-A, Moonrock Apartment
Humayunnagar Post, Masab Tank, Hyderabad-500028.
12. K.Madhava Rao, S/o Late K C Narayana Rao
Aged about 72 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad.
R/o H.No.5-106/1, Bhavani Nagar
Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad-500060. .....Applicants
(By Advocate: Sri K.R.K.V.Prasad)
Vs.
1. Union of India represented by
The Secretary
Ministry of Labour & Employment
Government of India, New Delhi.
2. The Director General
E.S.I. Corporation, Head Quarters Office
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=
NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD,
Phone=
PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf
aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4
1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=
PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
3
OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
Panchdeep Bhavan, C.I.G.Marg
Kotla Road, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Assistant Director (Estt.III)
ESI Corporation Headquarters Office
Panchdeep Bhavan, C.I.G.Marg
Kotla Road, New Delhi-110001.
4. The Deputy Director (In-charge)
Regional Office, ESI Corporation
Hill Fort Road, Adarshnagar
Hyderabad-500004. ....Respondents
(By Advocate: Sri N.Srinivasa Rao, SC for ESIC)
(OA.No.021/00678/2023)
A.B.Sastry, S/o Late A.L.Narayana
Aged about 71 years, Occ: Deputy Director (Retd.)
Regional Office, E.S.I. Corporation, Hyderabad
R/o 12-1-263, Road No.1/6, Anand Nagar
Hyderabad - 500 068. .....Applicant
(By Advocate: Sri K.R.K.V.Prasad)
Vs.
1. Union of India represented by
The Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Employment
Government of India, New Delhi.
2. The Director General
E.S.I. Corporation, Head Quarters Office
Panchdeep Bhavan, C.I.G.Marg
Kotla Road, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Assistant Director (Estt.III)
ESI Corporation Headquarters Office
Panchdeep Bhavan, C.I.G.Marg
New Delhi-110001.
4. The Regional Director
Regional Office, ESI Corporation
Hill Fort Road, Adarshnagar
Hyderabad-500004. ....Respondents
(By Advocates: Smt.B.Gayatri Varma, Sr.CGSC & Sri N.Srinivasa Rao, SC for
ESIC)
*****
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=
NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD,
Phone=
PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf
aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4
1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN=
PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
4
OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
ORDER
PER: HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. The issues raised and the relief claimed in the two OAs are identical in nature and, hence, they have been taken up together for consideration and passing a common order. With the consent of both the parties, Original Application No.420/2023 is being treated as the lead case.
2. The relief sought by the applicants in both the OAs, are as follows:
"....to call for the records pertaining to the Letter No.B- 11/14/01/2005-E-III dated 09.06.2020 and set aside and quash the said letter; and direct the respondents to fix the pay of the applicant in the pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005 and accordingly revise pension to be drawn on the revised last pay to be drawn, duly disbursing the monitory benefits of arrears with all consequential benefits for a period preceding three years from the date of filing of this application and pass any other order or orders in the interest of justice."
3. The brief facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, are as follows:
i. The applicants are retired employees of the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC, in short). They retired from the service of the respondent ESIC on (1) 31.05.2010 (2) 31.08.2016 (3) 31.07.2012 (4) 30.09.2011 (5) 28.02.2007 (6) 31.12.2008 (7) 30.06.2010 (8) 31.05.2006 (9) 31.05.2017 (10) 30.0.2016 (11) 31.07.2022 (12) 30.06.2010, respectively. The service particulars of the individual applicants, covering the dates of joining service, dates of subsequent promotions/dates on which financial upgradations were given, etc., are furnished in Annexure-2 to the OA. Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 5 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 ii. It is argued that, in terms of the communication received from the 1st Respondent Ministry, vide letter, dt.10.11.1989, r/w DoP&T Note, dated 10.12.2001, consequent to an amendment to the ESIC Act, 1948, w.e.f. 08.11.1989, the respondent Corporation (ESIC) need not take the approval of the Central Government for framing Recruitment Rules of its employees. It could be done by the ESIC directly in consultation with the UPSC, wherever necessary, i.e., for Group A posts. Further, in terms of the D.O. Letter No.7(7)/Co-ord/02, dated 14.06.2005, the respondent Corporation need not refer matters relating to creation of posts and other establishment related matters to the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure. In terms of Section 17(2) of the ESI Act, 1948, ESIC employees' pay scales were to be on par with those for corresponding posts in the Central Government.
iii. It is added that the CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2008, in respect of the 6th CPC pay scales, were notified on 29.08.2008. Thereafter, the respondent Corporation, in its meeting held on 09.09.2008, had approved the 6th CPC pay structure, in toto, and communicated its implementation, as per Memo No.A.27(17)1/VI, dt.11.09.2008.
Assistant Directors/Managers Grade-I were placed in the revised pay scale of the 6th CPC, w.e.f. 01.01.2006, in PB-2, i.e., Rs.9300-34800, with Grade Pay of Rs.4800, as per Serial No.10 of the statement at Annexure-I to the said memo, dt.11.09.2008. Though the corresponding pre-revised scale of pay for GP Rs.4800 was Rs.7500- 12000 in the 5th CPC, the respondent Corporation, without upgrading the Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I to the pay scale of Rs.7500- Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 6 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 12000 in the 5th CPC, during the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005, straight away placed the applicants in PB-2 with GP 4800.
iv. According to the applicants, the respondent Corporation, at Para No.3 of letter No.A/27/17/1/6th CPC/2008-E-III, dt.26.10.2009, had categorically admitted that, based on the recommendations of the 6th CPC, the Central Government had revised the pay scale of Section Officers from Rs.7500-12000 to Rs.9300-34800 with the Grade Pay of Rs.4800 in PB2. Further, as per Para No.4 of the said letter, dt.26.10.2009, it was stated that the Central Government had removed the anomaly in the Central Secretariat Services. Accordingly, the respondent Corporation also granted Grade Pay of Rs.4800 to Asst.
Directors in terms of Section 17 (2) of the ESI Act, 1948, without upgrading the pay scale of Asst. Directors/Managers Grade-I from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000, during the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005, on par with similarly situated employees. The respondent Corporation turned down the request of the applicants, vide letter No.P-ii/14/01/2005-EIII, dt.09.06.2020. The impugned letter has been supplied to the applicants by way of reply under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
v. According to the applicants, there has been historical parity in the pay scales of the employees/Officers of the above cited cadre of ESIC with those of Income Tax / Central Excise, right from 01.01.1986, since the 4th CPC days. The Ministry of Finance had upgraded the pay scale of Inspectors in Income Tax & Central Excise from the existing Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 7 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 scale of Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500, w.e.f. 21.04.2004, with avenue for further promotion as Income Tax Officer/Superintendent, Central Excise, from the existing pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000, w.e.f. 21.04.2004, as per OM F.No.6/37/98 IC, dt.21.04.2004. The respondent ESIC, in its meeting, held on 11.10.2007, had approved and implemented this upgradation, vide letter, dt.24.10.2007, only for the post of Insurance Inspectors/Managers Grade II/OS (Group C) equating them in the ESIC with the post of Inspector in Income Tax/Central Excise, without any orders in respect of the promotion post of Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I. However, the consequential upgradation of pay scales of the next promotional cadre, i.e., Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I was not considered by the ESIC, without assigning any justification / grounds, even though upgradation to the promotional grade was effected in the Income Tax/Central Excise.
The respondent Corporation ought to have upgraded the pay scale of Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I, from the existing Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000, along with the upgradation of the pay scale of Insurance Inspector/Manager Grade-II, simultaneously. Such action/inaction on the part of the respondents resulted in identical pay scale of Rs.6500-10500, for the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005, in respect of both the feeder and the promotional posts, though the said posts fall in two different cadres and are functionally distinct and could not be given the same pay scale. This fact has been categorically admitted by the respondent ESIC, in its Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 8 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 Lr.No.A/11/14/1/2005-E3, dt.05.10.2018. But the respondent Corporation made correspondence with the 1st respondent Ministry, and the impugned letter, dt.09.06.2020, was circulated to the Regional Directors stating that, after seeking the advice of the Ministry, retrospective upgradation of the pay scale of Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I has not been found feasible and, therefore, not accepted.
vi. It is further submitted that the Government of India, MOPPG & Pensions, vide OM F.No.38/37/08-P & PW(A), dt.28.01.2013, clearly intimated, as per the Annexure under Sl.No.15, that for grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the corresponding scale of pay in the 5th CPC, was Rs.7500-12000 and not Rs.6500-10500. As far as the posts carrying the pay scale up to 10000-15200 (5th CPC) was concerned, the Director General, ESI Corporation, was delegated powers by the Standing Committee, as is evident from ESIC HW Letter No.A11/14/1/2005-E-III, dt.05.10.2018. vii. It is stated that the 1st applicant submitted a detailed representation, on 17.02.2017, to the 2nd respondent seeking enhancement of the scale of pay, but the Respondent Corporation sent RTI reply No.A/48/15/RTI/2019-E-III, dt.18.01.2021, enclosing therewith a copy of the said impugned letter, dt.09.06.2020. It was also stated that this ibid circular, dt.09.06.2020, disposes of all such representations in the matter, including that of the 1st applicant. The representation, dt.26.06.2020, submitted by the 8th applicant was also turned down by the 3rd respondent Corporation, vide the RTI reply, dt.18.06.2021. The Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 9 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 representation, of Applicant Nos.3, 6, 7, 9 & 10 have also been rejected, vide the said letter, dt.09.06.2020. The Respondent Corporation did not reply to the representations submitted by the applicants 2, 4, 5, 11 and 12. As per the letter No.ESIC/R/P/22/00476/HQ/RTI, dt.09.12.2022, the above reply, dt.09.06.2020, holds good. Thus, the grievance of the applicants, who retired in the cadre of Asst.Director/Manager Gr-I, remained unresolved, despite the fact that both the feeder and the promotional grades continued in the same scale of Rs.6500-10500.
viii. Applicants urged that the Respondent Corporation ought not to have made a reference to the MOLE/DoE/MF, in view of the earlier DO letter No.7/7/E-Coord/92, dt.14.06.2005, which clearly stated that, as far as ESIC is concerned, since the organization is not receiving any budgetary support from the Government, matters relating to creation of posts and other establishment related matters need not be referred to the DoE, Ministry of Finance. The respondent Corporation, vide Para No.(vi) in the letter No.A/11/14/1/2005-E3, dt.05.10.2018, vindicated the above stand. The Director General, on 22.02.2021, by quoting the above GoI DO letter, dt.14.06.2005, created the posts of Regional Medical Commissioner, which was approved, as per supplementary item No.ESIC-I of the Minutes of the Meeting. The D.G., ESIC, granted enhanced pay scale to Insurance Inspector/Manager Gr-II/Superintendent from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500, vide letter, dt.24.10.2007, but remained indifferent towards Assistant Director / Manager Gr-I, because of which there Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 10 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 was no proper fixation of pay, from time to time, in the case of the applicants and the last pay drawn remained relatively less than their entitlement, affecting the pension being drawn as well as the pensionary benefits.
4. The grounds raised by the applicants, are as follows:-
i. As per the observation of the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi in judgment, dt.16.01.2020 (Para No.32), in WP(C) 10645/2016, no decision to depart from extending the pay scale granted to the employees of the Central Government to the employees of ESIC is permissible, as per the applicable norm under Section 17(2) of the ESI Act, 1948. However, implementation of the said decision of the Government of India order, dt.21.04.2004, was partial to the extent of the feeder cadre of Insurance Inspectors/Manager Grade- II/Superintends only, without upgrading the pay scale of the promotional grade of Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I (Group B) from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000, for the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005.
ii. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, in OA.No.180/00174/2005 and in other similar matters, vide order, dt.18.01.2023, held, at Para No.15, that when the posts could not be merged, it is clear that the posts in the feeder and the promotional cadres cannot and should not be granted the same pay scale.
iii. The impugned replies are derogatory to the policy particular to the respondent Corporation as the employees of the respondent Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 11 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 Corporation are entitled to the same pay and other allowances as are applicable to the Officers and employees of the Central Government having similar duties, responsibilities, qualifications, etc. This is a statutory obligation on the part of the respondents which cannot be shelved or shirked under any pretext.
iv. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana has observed, at Para No.9, of their judgment, dt.15.05.1991, in CWP.6156 of 1987 reported as Hawa Singh Sangwan vs. Union of India & Others 1991(6) SLR 753, that no governmental agency can be permitted to take advantage of its own wrong. Hence, the applicants are not to blame for the action/inaction of the respondent Corporation. The respondents also cannot take the plea of financial burden because of upgradation of pay scales, retrospectively. The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack in W.P.(C) No.8205 of 2017, decided on 10.01.2018, has observed that, in the case of payment of monetary benefits, retrospectively, to employees, the financial burden cannot arrest the right of the employees working under the State.
v. By the aforesaid action of the respondents, the applicants' pay has continued in the pay scale of Rs.6500-200-10500, instead of being fixed in the pay scale of Rs.7500-12000, for the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005, with all consequential benefits, till retirement, resulting in less pensionary benefits and pension. Hence, the impugned replies are liable to be set aside by declaring the said action as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable, smacking of malice in Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 12 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 law and being against the principles of natural justice, in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
5. On notice, Respondents have appeared through their counsel and have filed their reply statement, wherein they submit that -
i. The post of Assistant Manager Grade-I in the respondent ESIC was never upgraded to Rs.7500-12000. Consequent upon the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC, in the Respondent ESIC, considering the functional justification and organizational requirement, 1. Assistant (pre-revised Rs.5000-9500),
2. SSO (pre-revised Rs.5500-10000 and notionally at Rs.6500-10500 from 21.04.2004), 3. Assistant Director (pre-revised Rs.6500-10500) were granted grade pay of Rs.4200 for the post of Assistant, Rs.4600 for SSO and Rs.4800 for Assistant Director.
ii. Countering the averments made in the OA, it is submitted that the post of Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Services also carried the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 and was, subsequently, granted only the grade pay of Rs.4800 and neither their pay scale was upgraded to 7500-12000 nor were they granted fixation. The claim of the petitioners, in this regard, is not based on facts.
iii. It is also submitted that the upgradation of pay for the post of Insurance Inspector/Assistant Director/Manager Grade-II was approved since the pay scale of this post in Central Excise / Income Tax was revised. The question of parity of the pay scales of the post of Insurance Inspector, with the posts in Central Secretariat, does not Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 13 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 arise, because there does/did not exist any post corresponding to the post of Insurance Inspector of the ESIC in the Central Secretariat Services. However, there does exist the post of Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Services, which corresponds to the post of Assistant Director in the ESIC and that post also carried the same pay scale of Rs.6500-10500. Since the pay scale of the corresponding post of Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Services was not revised, ESIC cannot (as per the provisions of section 17(2) of the ESI Act) revise the pay scale of Assistant Director of ESIC, since that will be a departure from the practice/policy and, for any departure, approval of the Central Government is mandatory, as per the ESI Act. iv. It is further submitted that even in the Central Secretariat Services, the post of Assistant and the post of Section Officer remained in the same pay scale of Rs.6500, for a short period of time. In the ESIC, the posts of Insurance Inspector and Assistant Director remained in the same pay scale, for a short while, that is, from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005.
v. It is also submitted that the Government of India, vide its letter, dt.09.10.2007, had already turned down the request for grant of higher pay scales for the post of Section Officer in the ESIC, by stating categorically that -
"The revision of pay scale of the next higher grade i.e. Assistant Director / Section Officer etc. must be referred to the next Pay Committee to be constituted to implement the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission as these pay scales have not been revised even in the Central Secretariat".
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 14 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 The post of Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Services which corresponds to the post of Assistant Director in the SSC also remained in the same pay scale till the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. However, on implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, the post of Insurance Inspector was granted the grade pay of Rs.4600/-, and the post of Asst.Director was granted higher grade pay of Rs.4800/-. Thus, the so-called anomaly ceased to exist from 01.01.2006. Even in that case, Insurance Inspectors of the ESIC were granted the monetary benefit from 01.10.2007 only.
vi. Section 17(2) (a) of the ESI Act, 1948, reads as follows -
"The method of recruitment, salary and allowances, discipline and other conditions of service of the members of the staff of the Corporation shall be such as may be specified in the regulations made by the Corporation in accordance with the rules and orders applicable to the officers and employees of the Central Government drawing corresponding scales of pay:
"PROVIDED that where the Corporation is of the opinion that it is necessary to make a departure from the said rules or orders in respect of any of the matters aforesaid, it shall obtain prior approval of the Central Govt."
In accordance with the provisions of the ESI Act, as mentioned above, ESIC duly referred the issue of grant of higher pay scales to Assistant Directors of the ESIC, but the same was rejected by the Central Government.
vii. It is not for the applicants to dictate what the DG should have done or not done. The fact is that the Director General, ESIC, followed the provisions of the ESI Act, in referring the matter to the Central Government. The Central Government considered the issue and Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 15 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 replied, vide letter, dt.09.10.2007, that since the pay scale of the post of Section Officer in the Central Secretariat Services was also not revised, the request of the ESIC for revision of pay scale of Assistant Directors of ESIC must be referred to the Pay Committee to be constituted for implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC. The applicants have got what they are entitled to. The claim that non-grant of higher pay scale has caused loss to them in the pensionary benefits is irrelevant.
viii. As pleaded by the Respondents, revision of pay scale is a specialized task and it cannot be dictated by the individuals who tend to benefit from the revision of pay scales, and, considering the fact that the same was being addressed by the expert committee, i.e., the 6th Pay Commission, the Central Govt. rightly decided to wait for the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC. ix. On the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC, the post of Insurance Inspector was granted grade pay of Rs.4600/- whereas the post of Asst. Director was granted higher grade pay of Rs.4800/-. Thus, the so-called anomaly ceased to exist from 01.01.2006. However, even in that case, Insurance Inspectors of the ESIC were granted monetary benefits only from 01.10.2007, that is, after implementation of the 6th CPC.
x. The applicants were neither discriminated against nor denied any benefit which was legally due to them. Revision of pay scale or grant of higher pay scale can never be claimed as a matter of right.
Applicants are not entitled to the relief they are claiming.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 16 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 xi. Respondents have prayed that the OA, being devoid of merits, may be dismissed.
6. Applicants have filed a rejoinder reiterating the submissions already made in the OA.
7. Respondents have filed additional affidavit/reply stating that -
i. The ESI Act does not prohibit the ESIC from consulting the Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India, in any of its administrative matters.
ii. The decision conveyed by the Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India, vide letter No.A-32022/3/2017-SS-I, dt.06.01.2020, left nothing to the ESIC for further examination in the matter. Accordingly, ESIC Circular No.B-11/14/01/2005-W.III, dt.09.06.2020, finalized the matter.
iii. It is further submitted that the Government of India, vide its letter, dt.09.10.2007, has already turned down the request for grant of higher pay scales to the post of Assistant Director/Section Officers, etc., as these pay scales were not revised even in the Central Secretariat.
Hence, the question of grant of pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 to Assistant Director/Manager Grade-I, prior to 01.01.2006, in the ESIC does not arise.
8. Heard learned counsels for both the parties and perused the materials placed on record.
9. It is worth noting that these two OAs have been filed by the applicants after their retirement, seeking re-fixation of their pay from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005 Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 17 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 with consequential benefits, including revised pension and arrears. There is a big gap since the date of retirement of most of the applicants in OA.No.420/2023, as their representations annexed with the OA have been filed 4 to 13 years after their retirement, except in the case of Sri T.R.Narasinga Rao, Applicant No.11, who retired on 31.07.2022. His representation is dated 01.11.2022. The applicant in OA.No.678/2023, who retired on superannuation on 31.05.2013, has filed his representation in the year 2021. Applicants in both the OAs have challenged the order of the ESIC, dt.09.06.2020, which has been addressed to all the Regional Directors of the ESIC from the ESIC Headquarters. The contents of the impugned letter read as under:
"Sub: Upgradation of pay scale of Assistant Director /Manager Grade-I in ESIC from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000 - reg.
Sir, The issue of upgradation of pay scale of Assistant Director / Manager Grade-I in ESIC from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000 w.e.f. 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005 has been examined and also sought advice of the Ministry.
In this regard, it is informed that the request for retrospective up- gradation of pay scale of Assistant Director / Manager Gr-I has not been found feasible and therefore, not accepted.
This issues with the approval of Competent Authority."
10. The final order above pertains to upgradation of pay scales of Assistant Director/Manager Gr.I in the ESIC from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000 w.e.f. 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005. The issue has been finally rejected through the impugned order. The said decision has been taken on the basis of the direction of the Central Government to the DG, ESIC, vide letter, dt.09.10.2007, of the Ministry of Labour and Employment, on the same subject, as dealt with in the impugned order, dt.09.06.2020. The advice given by the Ministry is as follows:
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 18 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 Sub: Revision of pay scale in respect of the post of Insurance Inspector/Manager Gr.II/Superintendent in ESI Corporation - Reg.
Sir, I am directed to refer to your office letter No.B.11/14/1/05-E.III dated the 6th September, 2007 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the demand for higher pay scales of Insurance Inspectors/Manager Gr.II may be decided by the ESI Corporation due to emergence of new facts i.e. the revision of the pay scales of Income Tax/Central Excise Inspectors as the matter falls within the purview of ESI Corporation as per Section 17(2) of the ESI Act, 1948.
The revision of pay scales of the next higher grade i.e. Assistant Directors/Section Officer etc. must be referred to the next Pay Committee to be constituted to implement the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission as these pay scales have not been revised even in the Central Sectt. (emphasis added) This has the approval of Hon'ble Minister of State for Labour & Employment (IC)."
11. The correspondence placed before us in respect to the issues raised by the applicants shows that the ESIC had identified the anomalous situation in respect of the pay scale of Assistant Director/Manager Gr.I, since the pay scale of Insurance Inspector/Manager Gr.II had been revised from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 to bring them on par with the pay scale of Inspector of Central Excise whereas the next promotional post of Assistant Director was left in the existing pay scale of Rs.6500-10500. The said anomaly was removed by the Central Government in the Central Secretariat Services and, thereafter, ESIC also granted the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- to Assistant Directors, based on the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission.
12. The letter of the ESIC Hqrs., dt.18.04.2017, addressed to the Ministry of Labour & Employment (Ann.A/2 to the Rejoinder), narrates the entire sequence of events as given hereunder:
"The issue of revision of pay scale of Insurance Inspector / Manager Gr.II / Superintendent from Rs.5500-175-9000 to Rs.6500-200-10500 was placed before the Corporation in its meeting held on 23.12.2006, wherein Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 19 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 it was decided that the matter needs reconsideration in as much as the Gov. of India have revised the scale of pay for Income Tax Inspectors and Customs and Central Excise Inspectors in April 2004 and it was decided to refer the issue to the Ministry of Labour & Employment.
Accordingly, the issue was referred to the Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India. The Ministry vide its letter No. S- 38016/3/2004/SS-I dated 09.10.2009 directed by the ESI Corporation due to emergence of new facts i.e. the revision of the pay scale of Income Tax/ Central Excise Inspectors as the matter falls within the purview of ESI Corporation as per Section 17(2) of the ESI Act, 1948. Further, the Ministry added that the revision of pay scales of the next higher grade i.e. Assistant Directors /Section Officer etc. may be referred to the next pay Committee to be constituted to implement the recommendation of the 6th CPC as these pay scales have not been revised even in the Central Secretariat.
Accordingly, an Agenda was placed in the Corporation meeting held on 11.10.2007 for grant of scale of Rs.6500-10500 to Insurance Inspector /Manager Gr.II. The Corporation approved the Agenda. ESI Corporation vide its letter dated 24.10.2007 revised the pay scales of Insurance Inspector / Manager Gr.II.
However, it is informed that no pay committee was setup in ESIC for implementing the recommendations of 6th CPC in ESIC. The recommendations of 6th CPC were adopted in ESIC in toto.
The upgradation of pay scale of Insurance Inspector /Manager Gr.II / Superintendent from 5500-9000 to 6500-10500 w.e.f. 21.01.2004 resulted an anomaly as both the feeder cadre (Insurance Inspector /Manager Gr.II / Superintendent) and the promotional cadre (Assistant Director / Manager Gr.I) had same pay scale i.e. 6500-10500 w.e.f. 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005. The matter to upgrade the pay scale of Assistant Director / Manager Grade-I from Rs.6500-10500 to Rs.7500-12000 notionally w.e.f. 21.04.2004 with monetary benefit from 01.10.2007 has been examined in consultation with Finance Division of this office.
The Finance Division is of the view that the post of Assistant Director in ESI Corporation is analogous to the post of Section Officer of Government of India. Further, the scale of Assistant Director is equivalent to the entry grade of Group B Officer. In view of this, the Finance Division has opined that the issue may be referred to DoPT for guidance in the matter.
In view of above, it is requested to take up the matter with DoPT for guidance."
13. In a subsequent letter, dt.23.08.2019, of the ESIC Hqrs., to the M/o Labour & Employment, on the subject, the following noteworthy points have been made for consideration -
"(i) The correspondence with MOL&E on the above matter was going on for about 12 years since up-gradation of pay scales of SSO in the year Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 20 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 2007. While upgrading the scale of SSOs the effect of up-gradation was given from 21.04.2004, however, the monetary benefit accrued only from 01.10.2007.
(ii) The decision to effect monetary benefits from 01.10.2007 attracted a number of litigations from pensioners who retired between 01.05.2004 to 30.09.2007. They were deprived of the said financial upgradation as they were given notional fixation of pay and thereafter no pension benefits. As the pension is fixed on the basis of last drawn pay (notional fixation of pay, if any is not accounted for pension) the employees retired during the above period did not get the benefits of upgradation.
(iii) Smt.P.Sarojini, SSO retired on 31.12.2006 approached CAT Ernakulam Bench in OA No.1105/2011 seeking pension benefits as per the upgraded scale. The Hon'ble Court directed ESIC to restore pay fixation benefits and to grant her arrears of pension arising there from. The ESI Corporation challenged the order of the CAT before Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, under OP(CAT)No.2524/13 but the High Court upheld the order of CAT and she was granted pension benefits.
(iv) Subsequently, pensioners (SSO) who have retired during the above period approached various courts in the country seeking similar relief granted to Smt.P.Sarojini. the legal counsel of ESIC has advised that it is not a fit case of filing SLP before Hon'ble Supreme Court as "there is no justification in denying benefits of enhancement of scale for purpose of pension even if the enhancement was notional once it is admitted that the employee was on service on the date when the notional enhancement of scale was implemented."
(v) As there was no scope of relief to ESIC in respect of about 40 cases in various courts, an agenda was placed at the 172nd meeting of ESI Corporation held on 06.12.2017 for grant of pension benefits to the remaining 442 pensioners (SSO) who retired from ESIC between 01.05.2004 and 30.09.2007. Pension benefits were released to all of them.
In case of Assistant Director / Manager Gr.I cadre, the anomaly of both the feeder and promotional cadre placed in the same scale of pay was rectified on implementing 6th CPC w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The matter being more than 12 years old and 2 CPCs have been implemented in the ensuing period, the proposed up-gradation of pay scales of Asst. Director for a period of 20 months from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005 is likely to rake up plethora of administrative issues resulting in back dated revision of pay/pension similar to that in the case of Smt.P.Sarojni referred above.
Further, it may also be mentioned here that Senior Time Scale (STS) for Deputy Director was introduced in 2009 in ESIC. The Deputy Director (SS) and Jr.Director in ESIC remained placed to identical scale w.e.f. 27.02.2009 to 31.05.2011 until the anomaly removed in June, 2011.
Similarly, Asst. Nursing Superintendent (feeder cadre) and Deputy Nursing Superintendent (promotion cadre) were placed in PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- on the recommendation of 6th CPC. Incidentally, both cadres are placed in Pay Level 10 of the pay matrix in 7th CPC also.
Therefore, the matter of Asst.Director being placed in identical sale with the feeder cadre (that too for 20 months period) is not an isolated one. The issue has already been addressed on implementing 6th CPC w.e.f.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 21 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 01.01.2006 by placing SSO & Asst. Director in PB-2 with grade pay of Rs.4600/- and Rs.4800/- respectively. Considering the administrative issues that are likely to arise, it is not administratively prudent to take up the matter of upgrading of pay scale of Asst. Director retrospectively for the period from 21.04.2004 to 31.12.2005, any further.
The IFD of ESIC had disagreed with the proposal to up-grade the pay scale of Assistant Director/Manager Gr.I retrospectively on page 108/109 of the file with the remark that "it is pertinent to mention that post of Assistant Director in ESIC is analogous to the post of Section Officer of Govt. of India. Further, the scale of Assistant Director is equivalent to the entry grade of Group "B" officer. in view of this the F&A is of the opinion that the same may be referred to MOL&E / DOPT for guidance in the matter". The views of IFD were incorporated in ESIC letter of even number dated 18.04.2017 also."
14. We find that even in the amended Section 17(2), consultation between the Central Government and the ESIC is not precluded as it is clearly mentioned at Section 17(2) (b) that -
"....in case of any doubt, the Corporation shall refer the matter to the Central Government whose decision thereon shall be final."
Since parity is being claimed with reference to the order of the Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Expenditure, in terms of OM, dt.21.04.2004, whereby, the pay scales of the post of ITO and IT Inspectors under CBDT and Appraisers, Superintendents and Inspectors, etc., of Customs and Central Excise were revised, the respondents cannot be faulted for referring the matter to the Central Government/Min. of Labour & Employment.
15. It is also to be noted that, vide letter, dt.09.10.2007, the Ministry had allowed the ESIC that it may decide the demand for higher pay scales for Insurance Inspector / Manager Gr.II. However, in the case of revision of pay scales of the next higher grade i.e., Assistant Directors/Sections Officers, it was conveyed that the matter -
"must be referred to the next Pay Committee to be constituted to implement the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission as these pay scales have not been revised even in the Central Sectt." Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 22 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 As seen from the deliberations of the respondents, the anomaly, which had been flagged, was duly rectified on implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission Recommendations w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The department has informed the Ministry, as seen from the letters, dt.18.04.2017, 05.10.2018, and 23.08.2019, that no separate Pay Committee was set up in the ESIC, as the recommendation of the 6th CPC was adopted by them, in toto. In fact, even at the late stage, by sending a self contained note on 05.10.2018, it was requested that decision in respect of upgradation of pay scale of Assistant Director/Manager Gr.I, may be furnished for guidance. In the letter, dt.23.08.2019, there is a reference of the decision of the CAT, Ernakulam Bench, in OA.No.1105/2011 as well as the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in OP (CAT) No.2524/2013, upholding the order of CAT, whereby the petitioner, Smt.P.Sarojini, S.S.O., was given the benefit in pension as per the upgraded scale.
16. Applicants have relied upon the judgment, dt.16.01.2020, of the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi in WP(C) 10645/2016. We find that the facts in this OA vis-a-vis those in the matter before the Delhi High Court are quite different. The following paras are extracted which are self explanatory in the judgment:
"19. The Respondents, thereafter, themselves convened a Committee for the removal of anomalies. The said 'Pay Committee' submitted its detailed report where, inter-alia, the revision of the pay scale of Radiographers in the pay scale of Rs.4,500-7,000/- was fixed at Rs.5,000-8,000/-.
x x x x
31. In the present case, it is seen that there was already a Pay Committee that recommended the grant of the revised pay scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- to Radiographers, accepting the recommendations of the 5th CPC. There was no justification for the withdrawal of the said revised pay scale on the ground of difference in educational qualifications. As far as the education qualifications for the post of Radiographers in the ESIC is concerned, they differ very slightly from Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 23 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 the qualifications for the post of Radiographers in the CGHS and other Government Hospitals. While the qualification for the post of Radiographers in the ESIC is matriculation or equivalent qualification from a recognised board and a two years‟ diploma course in Radiography, the corresponding qualification in the CGHS is different only to the extent that a three years‟ diploma course is required. This difference of a year in the lengths of the required diploma courses cannot be used to justify not giving the pay scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- to Radiographers working in the ESIC. This is made all the more significant when it is seen that the requirement of experience is the same for either Radiographers working in the CGHS, or with the ESIC.
32. Turning now to Section 17 (2) of the ESIC Act, it is seen that there was no decision taken to depart from the applicable norm of extending to employees of the ESIC the pay scales granted to employees of the Central Government.
Therefore, even from the perspective of Section 17 (2) of the ESIC Act, the impugned decision to withdraw the revised pay scales of Rs.5,000-8,000/- cannot be sustained.
33. The CAT ought to have granted the relief itself to the Petitioners instead of relegating the matter to the Respondents to examine it afresh. Since the Pay Committee had already examined this question in light of the recommendations of the 5th CPC, there was no need for re-consideration on the part of the Respondents."
17. We have gone through the final order in OA.No.174/2005 as decided by the CAT, Ernakulam Bench. In the said order, dt.23.08.2006, the issue pertains to filling up of backlog vacancies of SC/ST in Gr. D Posts in Railway Mail Service, Trivandrum, and has nothing to do with revision of pay scale in the ESIC. The facts in the case of Hawa Singh Sangwan vs. Union of India & Others, decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana, also differ in as much as that case pertains to selection of the applicants in the rank of Sub-Inspector with retrospective effect. As regards the principle that no government agency can be permitted to take advantage of its own wrong, there can be no doubt. As regards WP(C) No.8205 of 2017, decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa, the issue therein pertained to release of arrears due to the employees in keeping with the principles of natural justice under Article 14.
It was also enunciated that constitutional safeguards to the employees cannot be denied on the plea of financial burden to the State.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 24 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
18. We have also referred to the rulings referred to at para-(iii) of the ESIC Hqrs., to the M/o L&E, in the letter, dt.23.08.2019.. The case of Smt.P.Sarojini, SSO, before CAT, Ernakulam Bench in OA.No.1105/2011 pertained to counting of notional benefit in the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 with Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-
towards calculation of pension and retirement benefits. It was observed that "if there is notional pay, it follows that there shall be notional pension too". The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in OP (CAT) No.2524/2013, upheld the orders of CAT, Ernakulam Bench in OA.No.1105/2011 and declared the applicant therein entitled to revision of pension.
19. Thus, it is found that, as discussed in the order of the Delhi High Court in WP(C) 10645/2016 supra, the decision to revise the pay scale was based on the recommendation of the Pay Committee. In the present case, in respect of the applicants, there was clear instruction to refer the matter to the Pay Committee, which was not set up. It has also been seen that the counterparts of those in the Assistant Director cadre in the ESIC, i.e., Section Officers in the Govt. of India, had also not been given any upgradation. It was clearly a matter where unilaterally giving pay upgradation to Assistant Directors/Managers Gr.I would have been a departure from the set policy of parity with the scales in the Central Government.
20. It is well known that Courts and Tribunals are not ordinarily required to interfere with policy matters, especially in respect of the pay, for which expert bodies are set up from time to time. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of BALCO Employees' Union (Regd.) v. Union of India, (2002) 2 SCC 333, held as under:-
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYAPANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 25 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023
42. While considering the validity of the industrial policy of the State of Madhya Pradesh relating to the agreements entered into for supply of sal seeds for extracting oil in M.P. Oil Extraction v. State of M.P. the Court held as follows:
"41. After giving our careful consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case and to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it appears to us that the Industrial Policy of 1979 which was subsequently revised from time to time cannot be held to be arbitrary and based on no reason whatsoever but founded on mere ipse dixit of the State Government of M.P. The executive authority of the State must be held to be within its competence to frame a policy for the administration of the State. Unless the policy framed is absolutely capricious and, not being informed by any reason whatsoever, can be clearly held to be arbitrary and founded on mere ipse dixit of the executive functionaries thereby offending Article 14 of the Constitution or such policy offends other constitutional provisions or comes into conflict with any statutory provision, the Court cannot and should not outstep its limit and tinker with the policy decision of the executive functionary of the State. This Court, in no uncertain terms, has sounded a note of caution by indicating that policy decision is in the domain of the executive authority of the State and the Court should not embark on the unchartered ocean of public policy and should not question the efficacy or otherwise of such policy so long the same does not offend any provision of the statute or the Constitution of India. The supremacy of each of the three organs of the State i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary in their respective fields of operation needs to be emphasised. The power of judicial review of the executive and legislative action must be kept within the bounds of constitutional scheme so that there may not be any occasion to entertain misgivings about the role of judiciary in out-stepping its limit by unwarranted judicial activism being very often talked of in these days. The democratic set-up to which the polity is so deeply committed cannot function properly unless each of the three organs appreciate the need for mutual respect and supremacy in their respective fields." (emphasis added) x x x x x
46. It is evident from the above that it is neither within the domain of the courts nor the scope of the judicial review to embark upon an enquiry as to whether a particular public policy is wise or whether Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 26 OA.No.420/2023 & 678/2023 better public policy can be evolved. Nor are our courts inclined to strike down a policy at the behest of a petitioner merely because it has been urged that a different policy would have been fairer or wiser or more scientific or more logical.
In this regard, the following specific observation of the Apex Court in the Constitutional Bench judgment in the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India,(2008) 6 SCC 1, is very much relevant:-
"37. The Indian courts have scrupulously refrained from entering into the domain of policy determination or policy evaluation while exercising the power of judicial review. This Court has emphasised that it does not sit in appeal over a policy decision and does not substitute nor does it examine the wisdom of the policy choice. It interferes with policy decision only when it finds the policy to be palpably arbitrary, mala fide or discriminatory."
The Apex Court in the case of Basic Education Board, U.P. v. Upendra Rai,(2008) 3 SCC 432, at page 437 has observed as follows :
"15. Grant of equivalence and/or revocation of equivalence is an administrative decision which is in the sole discretion of the authority concerned, and the court has nothing to do with such matters. The matter of equivalence is decided by experts appointed by the Government, and the court does not have expertise in such matters. Hence it should exercise judicial restraint and not interfere in it."
21. In the light of the above discussion, we do not find any force in the arguments of the applicants. The OAs are, therefore, dismissed. Pending MAs, if any, stand closed. No order as to costs.
(Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi) (Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
24.10.2025
/ps/
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
PANDIRLA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU= DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= PALLI ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d179209a8c2cf aa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba7768772f4 1813a4eb590082, [email protected], CN= PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Location:
Date: 2025.10.24 13:07:27+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0