Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Parveen Kumar vs Govt. Of Nctd on 27 October, 2021
1
Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 2383/2021
M.A. No. 3015/2021
M.A. No.3016/2021
This the 27th day of October, 2021
Through Video Conferencing
Hon'ble Ms. Manjula Das, Chairman
Hon'ble Mr. Mohd.Jamshed, Member (A)
1. Parveen Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 46 Years,
S/o Late Sh. Attar Singh,
R/o XF - 2, Shiva Enclave, A-4,
PaschimVihar,
Delhi - 110063.
2. Manoj Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 50 Years,
S/o Sh. KedarNath,
R/o H. No. 160, Block - B, Sector - 19,
Noida, U.P-201301.
3. Raj Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 48 years,
S/o Sh. Nanak Chand,
R/o 16/109-I, Bapa Nagar, H.S. Road,
Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005.
4. Kaushish Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 44 Years,
S/o Sh. S.N. Kumar,
2
Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021
R/o 3243, School Street,
PaharGanj, New Delhi - 110055.
5. Suresh Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 50 Years,
S/o Sh. Puran Singh,
R/o H. No. 155A,
Village DhirpurNirankari Colony, Delhi - 110009.
6. Monika, Working as section officer Group (B),
Aged About 50 Years,
W/o Lakhvir Singh,
R/o - Flat No. 72, Pocket-SG, Dilshad Garden,
Jhilmil H.O, East Delhi - 110095.
7. Satendra Kumar, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 44 Years,
S/o Sh. D N Mahto,
R/o -D-5, GTB Hospital Campus,
Dilshad Garden, Delhi - 110095.
8. Anand Dabas, Working as section officer
Group (B),
Aged About 42 years,
S/o Sh. Rajender Singh,
R/o H. No. 80, Village MadanPur Dabas,
Delhi - 110081.
(through Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Through its Chief Secretary,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
New Secretariat, IP Estate, New Delhi - 110002.
2. The Secretary,
3
Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021
Services Department,
New Secretariat, IP Estate,
New Delhi.
3. The Joint Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block,
New Delhi.
4. The Chairman,
Delhi Staff Service Selection Board,
Karkardooma,
Delhi.
...Respondents
(through Sh. H.A. Khan and Sh. Amit Anand, Advocate)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Ms. Manjula Das, Chairman MA-3015/2021 This application has been filed by the applicants for joining in a single O.A. For the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed.
MA-3016/2021
2. This application has been filed by the applicants seeking exemption from filing typed copies of illegible/ dim annexures and translated documents. For the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed. 4 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 OA-2383/2021
3. This application has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"(a) To declare the action of respondents in not extending the benefits of Old Pension Scheme to the applicant as bad in law and direct the respondents to extend the benefits of order dated 19.09.2014 passed in OA No. 3472/2013 upheld by Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 13.09.2018 and Hon'ble Supreme Court by granting benefit of Old Pension Scheme as well as pay fixation as granted to applicants in said OA vide order dated 17.11.2020.
(b) To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 31.08.2021 and direct the respondents to fix the pay of applicants at par with their batch mates given appointment in 2003 and regulate their Pension under Old Pension Scheme governed under CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 and not under New Pension Scheme made effective from 01.01.2004 and give consequential benefits.
(c) To allow the OA with costs."
4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB) issued an Advertisement No.022/2002 in the year 2002 for selection and appointment to various posts, 5 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 including the post of Grade-IV DASS(Post Code No.22/2002) in Govt. of NCT of Delhi. The applicants applied for the post and appeared in the written examination held in the year 2002. The DSSSB - respondent No.4 declared the result and issued select list. However, the result of SC category for the same post was not declared nor reasons were disclosed. Thereafter, the respondents declared the result of Ex- Servicemen against 37 vacancies vide Order No. 39 dated 26.06.2003. The applicant contends that as the result of other categories was declared and appointments were made. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the other candidates, whose results were declared by the respondents, have joined. On a query about delay in declaration of their results, the respondent No.4 assured the applicants that no prejudice would be caused to them on account of delay and that their results could not be declared due to pendency of LPA No. 625/2002, which was filed against CWP No.5061/2001 (Kunwar Pal & Ors. 6 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi). Finally, the results of the applicants were declared and they were issued offer of appointment in the years 2005 to 2006 to the party to LPA No. 625/2002.
5. Vide order dated 19.07.2006, the Government of NCT of Delhi adopted the New Pension Scheme dated 22.12.2003 framed by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance and made applicable to the employees of Government of NCT of Delhi retrospectively for those, who entered the service on or after 01.01.2004. The employees, who joined Government of NCT of Delhi on or after 01.01.2004, were not allowed to be governed by the Old Pension Scheme under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.
6. The grievance of the applicants is that their selection was against the vacancies notified in the year 2002 and, hence, they should be given the benefit of Old Pension Scheme. It is also contended that identically placed persons had approached this 7 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 Tribunal, wherein their cases were allowed and the respondents were directed to grant the benefits of Old Pension Scheme to those persons.
7. Learned counsel for applicants is seeking extension of benefit of judgment passed by the Tribunal in OA Nos. 183/2009, 3719/2009, 1795/2011 and 2045/2010, wherein the respondents were directed to fix their seniority with effect from the dates their batch- mates came to be appointed with benefits of pay fixation and Old Pension Scheme. The learned counsel relied on the judgment in various other OA Nos.591/2016 and 4297/2017, being similarly situated. He has also relied on the order of this Tribunal dated 19.09.2014 passed in OA No.3472/2013, which was upheld by Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 13.09.2018 as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10.07.2019, by granting the benefit of Old Pension Scheme as well as pay fixation as granted to applicants therein. The respondents have also 8 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 implemented the aforesaid order dated 19.09.2014, vide their order dated 17.11.2020.
8. The applicants submitted that despite being similarly situated with the applicants in OA Nos. 183/2009, 3719/2009, 2045/2010, 3472/2013 and 4297/2017, they have been discriminated and denied the legitimate rights accruing therefrom. It is further stated that despite being identically placed, they are compelled to approach this Tribunal for the same benefits as granted to similarly placed persons.
9. Learned counsel for the applicants also drew our attention to the Department of Pension and PW's Office Memorandum No.57/04/2019-P&PW(B) dated 17.02.2020 on the subject of "Coverage under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, in place of National Pension System, of those Central Government employees whose selection for appointment was finalized before 01.01.2004 but who joined Government service on or after 01.01.2004", 9 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 particularly to para 4 of the said OM, which reads as under:
"4. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Department of Personnel & Training, Department of Expenditure and Department of Legal Affairs in the light of the various representations/references and decisions of the Courts in this regard. It has been decided that in all cases where the results for recruitment were declared before 01.01.2004 against vacancies occurring on or before 31.12.2003, the candidates declared successful for recruitment shall be eligible for coverage under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Accordingly, such Government servants who were declared successful for recruitment in the results declared on or before 31.12.2003 against vacancies occurring before 01.01.2004 and are covered under the National Pension System on joining service on or after 01.01.2004, may be given a one-time option to be covered under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. This option may be exercised by the concerned Government servants latest by 31.05.2020."(Emphasis supplied)
10. Today, we heard Mr. M K Bhardwaj, learned counsel for applicant, Mr. H.A. Khan and Mr. Amit Anand, learned counsel for respondents, at the stage of admission.10 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021
11. In Inder Pal Yadav Vs. Union of India, 1985 (3) SCR 837, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that those, who do not come to the Court, need not be at a disadvantage to those, who rushed to the Courts and if they are otherwise similarly situated, they are entitled to similar treatment, if not by anyone else at the hands of this Court. In State of Karnataka and Others Vs. C. Lalitha, (2006) 2 SCC 747, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly. Only because one person has approached the court that would not mean that persons similarly situated should be treated differently [K.I. Shephard Vs. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 686; and K.T. Verappa and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, 2006 (9) SCC 406)].
12. In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the O.A. is disposed of and the respondents are directed to verify as to whether the applicants are 11 Item No. 17 O.A. No.2383/2021 similarly situated to the applicants in OA Nos. 591/2016, 4297/2017 and 3472/2013 (supra), in terms of Department of Pension and PW's Office Memorandum No.57/04/2019-P&PW(B) dated 17.02.2020; and if it is found that the applicants are similarly situated, consider their cases for fixation of pay in the Old Pension Scheme in terms of the directions contained in the aforesaid O.As. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the applicants.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(Mohd.Jamshed) (Manjula Das)
Member (A) Chairman
Vinita/akshaya