Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ansar Ali vs Defence on 15 January, 2025
1
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 3958/2023
M.A. No. 4798/2024
This the 15th day of January, 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1 MES- 370755 SH. ANSARI ALI S/O HARUN KHAN ALI,
60 YEARS WORKING AS MCM (RM) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT A-5, MAHAVIR
VIHAR , PALAM VILLAGE NEW DELHI 110045
2 MES-371281 SH. CHHOTAY LAL S/O RAM AVTAR, 62
YEARS WORKING AS MCM (RM) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT C-1/105, GALI
NO 5, MADHU VIHAR NEW DELHI 110059
3 MES-371236 SH. VIJAY KUMAR S/O RAMA NANDAN
PANDIT, 60 YEARS WORKING AS MCM (RM) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT B-
75 B BLOCK NEW JANKI PURI, UTTAM NAGAR NEW
DELHI 110059
4 MES-315490 SH. PARVEEN KUMAR S/O PURN SINGH,
56 YEARS WORKING AS MCM (CARP) IN THE OFFICE
OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT V8, OLD
NAGAL VILLAGE DELHI CANTT 110010
5 MES-374222 SH. MUKESH KUMAR S/O LT MADAN
LAL, 53 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-I) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
RZ 417 KAILASH PURI (EXT) GALI NO 11A, PALAM
COLONY NEW DLEHI 110045
6 MES-315314 SH. ANWAR S/O DEEWAN, 56 YEARS
WORKING AS R/M (HS-I) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U)
P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT E43/2, BLOCK E,
KABUL LINE DELHI CANTT 110010
7 MES-372427 SH. KISHAN BAHADUR S/O KARUN
BAHADUR, 59 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
RZ 154/74/511,GALI NO 9 SAGARPUR NEW DLEHI
110046
2
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
8 MES-371377 SH. DAYA RAM S/O SHEVA RAM, 60
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-I) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT KH NO 18/3, E
BLOCK QUTUB VIHAR PH-II NAJAFGARH DELHI
110071
9 MES-315183 SH. SATISH KUMAR S/O HARPHOOL
SINGH, 58 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
VILLAGE BIHARIPUR DEHLAWAS GULABPUR REWARI
HARYANA 123401
10 MES-369156 SH. DAVINDER KUMAR S/O LT GOVIND
RAM, 60 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-I) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
RZ C 15/13, MAHAVIR ENCLAVE NEW DELHI 110046
11 MES-372111 SH. SUKHBIR SINGH S/O MANPHOOL
SINGH, 60 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
VPO UJWA, BAKAR GARH WEST DELHI 110073
12 MES-602238 SH. PARVEEN SINGH S/O SHER SINGH,
38 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE OFFICE
OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 2036
TIGRI PANA NINDANA, ROHTAK HARYANA 124513
13 MES-480209 SH. SANJEEV KUMAR S/O AMAR NATH,
48 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE OFFICE
OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 64/15A,
CHAPEL STREET, LALKURTI BAZAR, MEERUT CANTT
UP 250001
14 MES-372067 SH. VIJENDER KUMAR S/O MEHAR
CHAND, 59 YEARS WORKING AS V/M (HS-I) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
96, 80 GAZ, HARIJAN BASTI, SULTAN PURI C BLOCK
DELHI 110086
15 MES-375246 SH. MOHAN LAL S/O CHIRANJI LAL, 57
YEARS WORKING AS V/M (HS-II) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 251
POCHANPUR VILLAGE, DELHI 110077
16 MES-374641 SH. DHARMA NAND S/O LAXMI DUTT, 57
3
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
YEARS WORKING AS MECH (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT P 72/4,
KABUL LINE DELHI CANTT 110010
17 Smt Rajwanti W/O MES-372892 Late SH. SURESH
KUMAR (EXPIRE) S/O PHOOL SINGH SAINI, YEARS
WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M
DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT C-34, GALI NO 3, NEAR
SAIN CHOPAL, WEST RAJIV NAGAR GURGAON
HARYANA 122001
18 MES-374628 SH. HIRA BALLABH S/O NARINA DUTT
JOSHI, 58 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
RZI 37B, MAHAVEER ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI 110045
19 MES-376336 SH. LAXMIKANT PAL S/O RAM ADHAR
PAL, 37 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE
OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT C-1/99 A,
GALI NO-4, MADHU VIHAR, NEW DELHI 110059
20 MES-376349 SH. BHUPENDRA S/O SAT NARAYAN, 35
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT D 86 B, OLD
SLUM QTRS, PASCHIM PURI DELHI 110063
21 MES-376339 MOHD IRFAN S/O SHABBIR HASSAN, 37
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT A38, NEAR
BARKATIA MASJID, SHIV VIHAR, VIKAS ENCLAVE,
UTTAM NAGAR NEW DELHI-110059
22 MES-376343 SH. PRAVAS KUMAR ANCHAL S/O LT
SIBA PRASAD ANCHAL, 37 YEARS WORKING AS R/M
(SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT
RESIDING AT T12/2(1/2) URI ENCLAVE DELHI CANTT
110010
23 MES-376338 SH. HARISH KUMAR S/O KASHI RAM, 36
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT E8/633,
UTTRANCHAL COLONY LONI BORDER, GHAZIABAD UP
201102
24 MES-376346 SH. SAURAV SINGH RAWAT S/O
NARENDER SINGH RAWAT, 34 YEARS WORKING AS
R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI
4
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
CANTT RESIDING AT RZ 26P/92/5B, GALI NO 39,
INDRA PARK, PALAM COLONY NEW DELHI 110045
25 MES-376335 SH. JAYANT KUMAR SINGH S/O RAMESH
KUMAR SHARMA, 35 YEARS WORKING AS ELECT (SK)
IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT
RESIDING AT WZ 1598, BHOOP SINGH BASTI, NAGAL
RAYA, NEW DELHI 110046
26 MES-376350 SH. ANSAR ALI S/O LT HARUN KHAN, 41
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT P35/3 URI
ENCLAVE, BRAR SQUARE DELHI CANTT 110010
27 MES-376351 SH. GAURAV SHARMA S/O VIMLESH
SHARMA, 33 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H
NO P 69/13 CVD LINE DELHI CANTT 110010
28 MES-376344 SH. TANUJ TAMRAKAR S/O LT KAMTA
PRASAD TAMRAKAR, 40 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK)
IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT
RESIDING AT WZ 525 A/2 2ND FLOOR NAGAL RAYA,
NEW DELHI 110046
29 MES-376340 SH. RAVINDER KUMAR CHOUDHARY
S/O RAMESHWAR PRASAD CHOUDHARY, 37 YEARS
WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M
DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO 20, VILL TARAINI,
SEKHUANI, MAHARAJGANJ, UP 273305
30 T No- SH. SACHINDER KUMAR S/O ANT RAM, 39
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 302/21, KELASH
COLONY, ITI KE SAMNE, SONIPAT, HARYANA 131001
31 MES-612078 SH. MUKESH VIJAYRAN S/O RAJKUMAR,
35 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO 18, GALI
NO 2, KIRARI SULEMAN NAGAR, NORTH WEST DELHI
110086
32 MES-376945 SH. RUPESH KUMAR S/O AJAY KUMAR,
27 YEARS WORKING AS V/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 57 BACK 2ND
FLOOR , BLOCK AZ, MOHAN GARDEN NEW DELHI
110059
5
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
33 MES-376942 SH. DINESH KUMAR S/O DHARMPAL, 33
YEARS WORKING AS V/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT MUNDI, REWARI,
HARYANA 123411
34 MES-377566 SH. ANOOP KUMAR MAHESWARI S/O
VIKRAM SINGH MAHESWARI, 33 YEARS WORKING AS
R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI
CANTT RESIDING AT B 280 GOKALPURI DELHI 110094
35 MES-377567 SH. ABLESH MEENA S/O MOHAN
MEENA, 29 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
VPO ADADUNGAR, TEHSIL SAPOTRA, DISTT KARAULI
RAJASTHAN 322218
36 MES-377568 SH. NARENDER S/O HARIPAL SHARMA,
37 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT RZ87/211, I
BLOCK STREET NO 8H SAGAR PUR NEW DELHI
110046
37 MES-377565 SH. AJAY KUMAR S/O DALBIR SINGH,
36 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO 1056,
RATERA, BHVANI HARYANA 127035
38 MES-377569 SH. ANIL SINGH S/O CHANDRAPAL
SINGH, 34 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT F
44/11 KABUL LINE DELHI CANTT 110010
39 MES-377622 SH.AJAY KUMAR S/O KAPIL DEV
MEHTO, 31 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H
NO P-234/07, CVD LINE DELHI CANTT 110010
40 T NO- 255 SH. JAI PRAKASH S/O ROHTASH SINGH, 56
YEARS WORKING AS MATE (V/M) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT VILLAGE
KHERKI POST BAIRAWAS DISTT MAHENDERGARH
HARYANA 123028
41 T No- SMT. BHAVNA JOSHI W/O 28 YEARS WORKING
AS MATE (V/M) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI
CANTT RESIDING AT RZ F2/176, GALI NO 5
6
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
MAHAVEER ENCLAVE NEW DELHI 110045
42 MES-376342 SH RIPUDAMAN S/O MANOHAR LAL, 36
YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 616/09, HARIJAN
BASTI, BINDAPUR, NEW DELHI 110059
43 MES -376337 SH PRAVEEN KUMAR YADAV S/O RAM
CHIZ YADAV, 33 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 23
SAINIK ENCLAVE PART-III NEAR SANT RLD SCHOOL,
UTTAM NAGAR NEW DELHI 110059
44 MES - 376941 SH RAVI S/O MALKHAN SINGH, 29
YEARS WORKING AS V/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT VILLAGE
BALEWA, PO KHALILPUR, DISTT GURGAON HARYANA
122502
45 MES - 377002 MRS DIVYA RANI SHARMA W/O
CHANCHAL KUMAR, 33 YEARS WORKING AS ELECT
(SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT
RESIDING AT F44/9, KABUL LINE, DELHI CANTT
110010
46 T NO-13055E SH ANAM CHARAN SWAIN S/O
BAIKUNTHA CHARAN SWAIN, 40 YEARS WORKING AS
MATE (FGM) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI
CANTT RESIDING AT FLAT NO UG 05, TOWER C,
DREAMZ HOME SOCIETY GHITORNI NEW DELHI
110030
47 MES-426492 SH ANIRUDH TOMAR S/O SHADEV
SINGH, 30 YEARS WORKING AS FGM (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
VPO BAULI, DISTT BAGHPAT, UP 250621
48 MES-376345 SH LOKENDER SINGH S/O BALRAM
SINGH, 33 YEARS WORKING AS FGM (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
VPO KHERI GADASIYA, TEHSIL BAYANA, DISTT
BHARATPUR, RAJASTHAN 321028
49 MES- 373073 SH CHHOTEY LAL S/O MARU RAM, 58
YEARS WORKING AS FGM (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO 30, POST
7
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
SAINI MOHALLA, TEHSIL BIJWASAN, SOUTH WEST
DELHI 110061
50 MES-375383 SMT LEELAWATI W/O LT RAM ACHAL,
55 YEARS WORKING AS FGM (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT RZ E 471,
GALI NO 28-30, SADH NAGAR, PALAM COLONY, NEW
DELHI 110045
51 MES-376348 SH LAL BAHADUR YADAV S/O LAXMI
NARAYAN YADAV, 34 YEARS WORKING AS ELECT (SK)
IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT
RESIDING AT VILL BHATPURA, POST KOILARA, DISTT
BHADOHI, UP 221306
52 MES-374623 SH RAMESH CHAND (RETD) S/O SOLI
RAM, 62 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
1334/261, GAON ALIPUR JATAV GALI, ALIPUR NEW
DELHI 110036
53 MES- 314227, SH DINESH (RETD) S/O NEKI RAM, 63
YEARS WORKING AS MCM (FGM) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT WZ 1249,
NANGAL RAYA NEW DELHI 110046
54 MES-371474 SH PURAN SINGH (RETD) S/O JEET
SINGH, 62 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (HS-II) IN THE
OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT
23/23 GALI NO 4, B BLOCK , GOYALA DAIRY NEW
DELHI
55 MES-372066 SH LAXMAN (RETD) S/O SHARDARE, 62
YEARS WORKING AS VEH /MECH (SK) IN THE OFFICE
OF GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 135,
GOPAL NAGAR, N BLOCK, NAJAFGARH, DELHI-110043
56 MES-508870 SH VINOD KUMAR S/O BALBIR SINGH,59
YEARS WORKING AS ELECT MCM IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT 212, NEAR
MORNING STAR PLAY SCHOOL, SANGHI KA BASS,
REWARI, HARYANA 123401
57 Ex JC-338665Y SH JAGBIR SINGH S/O KEHAR SINGH,
58 YEARS WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT VILLAGE
NAKLOI, DISTT SONIPAT, HARYANA 131402
8
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
58 MES-376347 SH AMIT S/O ANUP SINGH, 31 YEARS
WORKING AS R/M (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE (U) P&M
DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO 328, VPO SANKROR,
DISTT CHARKI DADRI, HARYANA 127042
59 MES-376943 SH AMIT KUMAR S/O LT RAVI DUTT, 33
YEARS WORKING AS ELECT (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT H NO MCF
6352, GALI NO 30, SANJAY COLONY SEC 23,
FARIDABAD, UP 281005
60 MES-377564 SH BRIJMOHAN S/O NAWAB SINGH, 30
YEARS WORKING AS MATE (FTR) IN THE OFFICE OF
GE (U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT VPO DHANA
TEJA, PO MATHURA REFINERIES, DISTT MATHURA,
UP 281005
61 MES-376323 SH GULAB SINGH S/O GYAN DAS, 39
YEARS WORKING AS FGM (SK) IN THE OFFICE OF GE
(U) P&M DELHI CANTT RESIDING AT KHASRA NO
41/03, LAMPUR ROAD, OM VIHAR, BANKNER, NORTH
WEST DELHI 110040
62 MES-371380 SH. LAL DEO MEHTO, R/M (HS-I)
....Applicants
(By Advocate:- Mr. I S Yadav)
Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary to Govt. of India,
Ministry of
Defence, New Delhi-110011.
2. Engineer in Chief, Ministry of Defence, Kashmir House,
Raja ji Marg, Army HQ, New Delhi-110001
3. Chief Engineer, Head Quarter, MES, Western
Command, Chandimandir-134107
4. Garrison Engineer, (Utilities) P&M, Delhi cantt-110010
...Respondents
(By Advocate:- Shri Abhishek Sharma)
9
Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) M.A. No. 4798/2024 This application has been filed by the learned counsel for the respondents for deletion of respondent no. 5 from the array of parties.
2. For the reasons stated therein and in view of the fact that the Chandigarh Cantt (respondent no. 5) is not a necessary party, the same is accordingly deleted as this matter pertains to Delhi Division only.
3. M.A. for deletion is allowed.
O.A. No. 3958/2023
4. In the instant O.A., the applicants have prayed for the following relief:-
"8 "i) That the record of the case may be called.
ii) That the impugned order dated 29 Nov 2023, dt 28 Dec 2022 and 15 Nov 2019 (Annexure A-1 coolly) to the extent denying the benefit of Dress Allowance, be quashed and set aside.
iii) That a direction be issued to the respondents to grant Dress Allowance to the applicants w.e.f. 1.7.2017 along with arrears of the same etc by extending them benefit of decision rendered by Hon'ble Tribunal Regional Bench Chandigarh in the case of Gurmeet Singh and Ors. vs U01 and Others, O.A. No. 1228/2019, allowed on
5.6.2020(Annexure A-7) and upheld by the Hon'ble 10 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order dated 4.10.2021 (Annexure A-8), in the interest of justice.
iv) That it be declared that the applicants are entitled to benefit of Dress Allowance w.e.f. 1.7.2017 in terms of the O.M. dated 2.8.2017 and 31.08.2017 issued by Govt of India along with all consequential benefits like arrears etc.
v) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may also pass any other Order, Direction in favour of the applicants which it may deem fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
vi) That the cost of the application may also be awarded in favour of the applicants."
5. The applicants herein are seeking dress allowance. Learned counsel for the applicant fairly states that the present issue has already been decided by a co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Chandigarh in O.A. No. 060/01362/2019. He further states that the said order has already attained its finality and the same has been implemented by the respondents. It is also highlighted by the learned counsel that the said decision has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CWP No. 19228/2021 on 04.10.2021 in batch of matter, with the following observation:-
Admittedly, the private respondents were working as Class-III and Class-IV employees in MES. They were considered as 'Industrial Employees'. In pursuance to the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission, the Government of India issued office memorandum dated 2.8.2017 with regard to grant of dress allowance to different categories of Central Government employees. The said office memorandum was reproduced by the Tribunal in Para No.11 of the 11 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V impugned order dated 5.6.2020. Pursuant to aforesaid office memorandum, the Government of India issued another office memorandum dated 31.8.2017 to the effect that, the dress allowance was to be payable at the rate of `5,000/- per year. Subsequently, vide letter dated 5.6.2018, the Principal Controller of Defence Account (Western Command), Chandigarh (in short 'Principal Controller') gave clarification that aforesaid benefit of dress allowance may be extended to civilians of MES including industrial personnel. Further clarification dated 2.8.2018 was given by the aforesaid authority that dress allowance is payable to employees (industrial /non-industrial), who are wearing basic uniform and / or drawing washing allowance. On the basis of the aforesaid office memorandums coupled with the clarifications, the authorities gave benefit of dress allowance to the private respondents and accordingly payment was made to them.
It appears that subsequently, Principal Controller vide letter dated 15.11.2019 informed the concerned authorities that the entitlement of dress allowance to industrial employees of MES is yet to be decided and he further directed that amount of dress allowance paid if any to aforesaid employees during the period from 2017-2018 to 2019-2020 may be recovered immediately. On the basis of aforesaid order, the concerned authorities were directed to effect recovery of due amount from the concerned employees, vide letter dated 18.11.2019.
It is not the case of the petitioners that the private respondents got aforesaid benefit of dress allowance by committing fraud or by misrepresenting the facts. From the perusal of letters dated 5.6.2018 and 2.8.2018, it transpires that before grant of dress allowance to the private respondents and other similarly situated employees, the concerned authorities took conscious decision regarding the same. It being so the petitioners cannot now effect recovery of the amount of dress allowance already paid to the private respondents in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rafiq Masih's case (supra) which clearly debars the Government from effecting recovery of any excess amount mistakenly paid to the Government employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service.12 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V Undoubtedly it is settled proposition that in case there was any mistake on the part of the Government authorities, it can be corrected by following due process of law. In this context, it may be appropriate to refer to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India and another vs. Narendra Singh (2008) 2 SCC 750 wherein it was held that if the respondent was erroneously promoted, though he was not eligible and qualified, the department can always rectify its mistake by following due process of law. It being so, if some benefit is given to the employees by the Government authorities under mistake, the said benefit would subsist till the mistake is corrected. In the instant case, it appears that the Government authorities had not taken any conscious decision as per law, to withdraw clarifications dated 5.6.2018 and 2.8.2018, or to withdraw the benefit of dress allowance.
In the light of the factual matrix and the settled position of law as discussed above, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal. Consequently, all the writ petitions are hereby dismissed being devoid of merits.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has referred to the decision taken by a co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 278/2023 on 22.07.2024 in the matter of Birbal and Others Vs. Union of India and Others, which reads as under:-
"4. In view of the above, no divergent view can be taken in respect of the same set of employees of an organization and it is fairly admitted fact that the order of Chandigarh Bench has been duly complied by the respondent authorities.
5. In view of the same, we dispose of the OA in terms of para 13 of the decision rendered in OA No 01228/2019 which is as under:-
'13. It is quite surprising that all of a sudden, the respondents have passed the impugned orders conveying that there is not even a decision as yet for grant of Dress Allowance to the category 13 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V of the applicants and as such the payment of allowance already made may be recovered, as clarified by PCDA, Chandigarh, and as such impugned orders of recovery were passed, that too in violation of the principles of natural justice. A perusal of both reproduced OMs would make it clear that a conscious decision was taken by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, New Delhi and then DoP&T (Nodal Department), pursuant to implementation of the 7th CPC recommendations, for grant of Composite Dress Allowance, instead of various allowances, which were discontinued, @ Rs.5,000/- per annum. The respondents have also not rebutted the averments made by the applicants that they stopped receiving the washing allowances from the date they started getting Dress Allowance @ Rs.5000/-per annum. Be that as it may, the fact remains that since a specific clarification has already been issued by the nodal Department of Personnel & Training, for grant of such allowance to the entitled categories, therefore, the view taken by respondents in withdrawing the same from the applicants and making recovery thereof cannot be sustained and as such the impugned orders in all these cases are quashed and set aside. The applicants are held entitled to grant of Dress Allowance and if any recovery has been made, the same be refunded to the relevant individuals involved in these cases. No costs."
He also places reliance on O.A. No. 1225/2024 passed on 22.10.2024 in the matter of Manjeet and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors, in identical situation the co-ordinate Bench has observed as under:-
"6. We also note that an identical matter was addressed in OA No. 01228/2019, decided by the Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal, where the issue was dealt with. The relevant paragraphs read as follows:-
"12. A perusal of the OM dated 2.8.2017 would disclose that Ministry of Finance has taken a conscious decision that in supersession of earlier orders relating to various allowances viz. Clothing, Initial Equipment, Kit maintenance, Robe, Robe maintenance, Show, Uniform and Washing etc. Dress Allowance was sanctioned and category of 14 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V staff, who was to be supplied uniforms and were required to wear them regularly like Trackmen, Running Staff Railways, Staff Car Drivers, MTS, Canteen Staff of Non-Statutory Departmental Canteens etc. was sanctioned a sum of Rs.5,000/- per annum and these various allowances were subsumed, no other allowance was to be paid. Pursuant to this memo, the DoP&T, nodal Department, also issued Office memo dated 31.8.2017, which clearly provides that Uniform Allowance/Washing allowance/Stitching Charges/Show Allowance etc. have been subsumed in Dress Allowance which shall be Rs.5,000/- per annum. which shall be credited to the salary of employees directly once a year in the month of July. As per para 7, this allowance covers only the basic uniform of the employees and any special clothing will continue to be provided by the concerned Ministry, as per existing norms. In compliance thereto, the PCDA, Chandigarh, vide decision dated 5.6.2018 (Annexure A-3), clearly indicated that benefit of OM dated 2.8.2017, may be extended to the civilian of MES including industrial personnel. Again there is a letter dated 2.8.2018 (Annexure A-4), indicating that competent authority has clarified that Dress Allowance is payable to industrial/non industrial employees w.e.f. 1.7.2017. Thereafter, the applicants were granted the benefit of Dress Allowance for the years 2017-18 to 2019-20.
13. It is quite surprising that all of a sudden, the respondents have passed the impugned orders conveying that there is not even a decision as yet for grant of Dress Allowance to the category of the applicants and as such the payment of allowance already made may be recovered, as clarified by PCDA, Chandigarh, and as such impugned orders of recovery were passed, that too in violation of the principles of natural justice. A perusal of both reproduced OMs would make it clear that a conscious decision was taken by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, New Delhi and then DoP&T (Nodal Department), pursuant to implementation of the 7th CPC recommendations, for grant of Composite Dress Allowance, instead of various allowances, which were discontinued, @ Rs.5,000/- per annum. The respondents have also not rebutted the averments made by the applicants that they stopped receiving the washing allowances from the date they started getting Dress Allowance @ Rs.5000/-per annum. Be that as it may, the fact remains that since a specific clarification has already been issued by the nodal Department of Personnel & Training, for grant of 15 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V such allowance to the entitled categories, therefore, the view taken by respondents in withdrawing the same from the applicants and making recovery thereof cannot be sustained and as such the impugned orders in all these cases are quashed and set aside. The applicants are held entitled to grant of Dress Allowance and if any recovery has been made, the same be refunded to the relevant individuals involved in these cases. No costs."
7. In view of the above, no divergent view is taken in the present matter. The OA is disposed of at the admission stage itself by directing the respondents to extend the benefits in terms of para 13 of the OA No. 1228/2019 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order."
7. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents would rely on the averments made in the counter affidavit, which reads as under:-
"4. A. That the contents of Para 4A of the O.A are a matter of record and hence require no comments. Anything contrary to the matter of record is wrong and hence denied.
B. That contents of Para 4B of the O.A are a matter of record and hence require no comments. Anything contrary to the matter of record is wrong and hence denied.
C. That in reply to the Contents of Para4C of the O.A, it is stated that from the MoD, the Respondents have not received any guidelines in this regard. For the purpose of seeking clarification, the Respondents already have initiated the steps by writing the letter to the Ministry of Defence. Thus, the Respondent are awaiting directions from the MoD, which is their controlling Authority.
D. That the contents of Para 4D of the 0.A are partly admitted. It is submitted that the issuance of O.M dated 02.08.2017 and 31.08.2017 are a matter of record. However, the respondents herein have not received any direction from the Ministry of Defence to grant Dress Allowance to the Applicants.
E. That the Contents of Para no. 4E of the O.A are matter of record and hence need no reply.However, 16 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V the respondents herein have not received any direction from the Ministry of Defence to grant Dress Allowance to the Applicants.
F. That the contents of Para 4F of the O.A are not denied till being factual in nature and being a matter of record. However, it is submitted that For the purpose of seeking clarification, the .· Respondents already have initiated the steps by writing the letter to the Ministry of Defence. The issue is being considered at present. Thus, awaiting directions from the MoD, the Respondents are unable to proceed with issue raised herein being pending before concerned authority. As no Direction has been issued pertaining to order of Government of India, Ministry of Finance OM dated 02"d August, 2017, therefore the overdue payment ofRs.5,000/- were recovered from the industrial personnel as directed by the Audit Authorities.
G. That in reply to the Contents of Para No. 4Gofthe
0.A it is stated that, Judgment passed by Hon'ble CAT Chandigarh dated 5th June, 2020 in OA No. 060/1228/2019 has been implemented with letter of spirit and industrial worker who were the Applicants in the aforementioned OA are still getting Dress Allowances Rs. 5,000/- per annum regularly after being issued sanction letter by government of India, Ministry of Defence.
H. That in reply to the contents of Para no. 4H of the O.A, it is stated that Judgment passed by Hon'ble CAT Chandigarh dated 5th June, 2020 in OA No. 060/1228/2019 has been implemented with letter of spirit and industrial workers who were Applicants in the OA are still getting Dress Allowances Rs. 5,000/- per annum regularly after being issued sanction letter by government of India, Ministry of Defence. Further, Respondents have forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/E1C(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating that matter is under consideration with MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, the relief sought by the Applicants is not liable to be granted.
I. That the contents of Para 4H are not denied till the extent of being / factual in nature. It is further 17 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V submitted that the Respondents have forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/E1C(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating that matter is under consideration with MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, the relief sought by the Applicants is not liable to be granted.
J. That the contents of Para J are a matter of record and hence require no comments. Anything contrary to the matter of record are wrong and hence denied.
K. That the Contents of Para No. 4K of the O.A are matter of record.However, it is stated that Respondents have .forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/ElC(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating 1hat matter is under consideration wifu MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, fue relief sought by the Applicant is not liable to be granted.
L. That the contents of Para 4L of the O.A are not denied till the extent of being a matter of record. Rest of the averments which are contrary to the matter of record are wrong and hence denied.
M. That the contents of Para 4L offue O.A are not denied till fue extent of being a matter of record. Rest of the averments which are contrary to the matter .of record are wrong and hence denied.
N. That the Contents of Para No. 4N of the O.A are matter of record. Respondents have forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/ElC(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating that matter is under consideration wifu MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, the relief sought by the Applicant is not liable to be granted. A true copy of the letter dated 30.06.2023 is annexed herewifu and marked as Annexure R-1.18 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023
Court No. V O. That the contents of Para 40 of the 0.A are wrong and denied. Respondents have forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/ElC(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating that matter is under consideration with MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, the relief sought by the Applicant is not liable to be granted.
P. That the contents Para 4P of the O.A are wrong and denied. Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Arvind Kumar Srivastava (2015) 1 sec 347 held that-
"22.2 ... Those persons who did not challenge the wrongful action in their cases and acquiesced into the same and woke up after long delay only because of the reason that their counterparts who had approached the Court earlier in time succeeded in their efforts, then such employees cannot claim that the benefit of the judgment rendered in the case of similarly situated persons be extended to them. They would be treated as fence-sitters and !aches and delay, and/or acquiescence, would be valid ground to dismiss their claim."
Q. That the contents of Para 4Q of the O.A are wrong and denied. It is submitted that Respondents have forwarded a communication letter No B/20943/Liv/Gen/E1C(2)/53 dated 30th June, 2023 stating that matter is under consideration with MoD regarding grant of Dress Allowance to all industrial employees of MES. Respondents are yet to receive any guidelines and direction in this regard. Thus, unless the guidelines be received by the Respondents herein from MoD, the relief sought by the Applicant is not liable to be granted.
R. That in reply to averments made in para R till para T of the OA it is submitted that the contents earlier paragraphs of this Counter Affidavit may be treated as part and parcel of this corresponding Para. Contents thereof are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.' 19 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V
8. Going by the counter affidavit, counsel for the respondents has urged that the present O.A. is devoid on merits and deserves to be rejected. It has been further averred that the applicant has not exhausted all remedies available to them under the rules before approaching this Hon'ble Tribunal. Further it has been highlighted that the judgment and order of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 060/01362/2019 cannot be extended to the applicants in the present matter, since the facts of that case are different and not similar to the present one.
9. It has been further averred that the applicants were authorized for Dangri, which cannot be classified as a Uniform as given in the Ministry of Finance Order dated 02 Aug 2017.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the present O.A. is liable to be dismissed on the limitation ground as the applicants herein are challenging the impugned order dated 28.12.2022 and the present O.A. was filed before this Tribunal in the year 2023, hence, it is time barred.
11. It has also been averred by the learned counsel for the respondents that this issue pertains to grant of dress allowances is a policy decision which is sub-judice before 20 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V the competent authority and unless and until the policy decision is taken no directions can be passed in the present matter. Once the policy decision is taken in the holistic manner it will be applied to across all levels irrespective of the categories of employees and no distinction could emerged which will provide multiples of litigation in the matter.
12. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of the case, this Tribunal does not find that there is any dis-similarity with the case adjudicated by this Tribunal at Chandigarh and up-held by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Based on the same analogy various O.As came to be decided more particularly O.A. No. 060/01228/2019 and in O.A. No. 060/01336/2019 etc. The issue of limitation in the present matter does not arise as the present matter pertains to dress allowance and in the light of the decision rendered in Union of India Vs. Naseem Singh the issue of limitation shall not come in the way.
It is not a matter of dispute that the present all the applicants are Dangri are industrial employees, which were provided Dangri dress on yearly basis with washing 21 Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V allowance per month. It is only on recommendation that the same was stopped. The decision has been taken qua the persons working in Chandigarh, whereas the applicants herein are working in Delhi Division. The issue here is of striking similarity to that of decision already taken at the Chandigarh Division only the respondents have to ensure that, if the applicants who were performing similar tasks have been accorded the benefits and the decision has been implemented by the respondents in Chandigarh Division. There is no reason to dis-belief that the contention urged by the learned counsel for the applicant and in light of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P. No. 10476/2020 same has to be implemented by the respondents across all over India. In view of the same, let an appropriate decision qua the dress allowance be taken in light of the aforesaid case laws within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Needless to mention that the consequential benefits shall also followed.
13. Accordingly, the present Original Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Associated M.As, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
22Item No. 43 O.A. No. 3958/2023 Court No. V
14. No order as to costs.
(Manish Garg) Member (J) /SG/