Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Sharad Athaley vs M/O Railways on 23 August, 2018
1 OA No.200/898/2011
Reserved
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.200/898/2011
Jabalpur, this Thursday, the 23rd day of August, 2018
HON'BLE MR. NAVIN TANDON, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Sharad Athaley/CLI/JBP S/o Shri S.S. Athaley, DOB-1.5.1965,
R/o 566 Narayan Nagar, Indra Gandhi Ward, Garha, Jabalpur -
482001 (M.P.).
2. K. Pereira/CPCOR/JBP, S/o Shri A.C. Pereira, DOB - 3.4.1955,
R/o 5, Kachnar Kshipra, Opposite G.S. Commerce College, South
Civil Lines, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
3. Trichendra Singh/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Y.P. Singh, DOT-
25.9.1967, R/o House No.3, Pushpak Nagar, Adhartal, Jabalpur -
482004 (M.P.).
4. R.K. Waghela/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri R.K. Waghela, DOB-8.1.1965,
R/o F-140, Tagore Colony, Station Road, Jabalpur - 482001
(M.P.).
5. S.K. Agrawal/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri C.B. Agrawal, DOB-29.6.1966,
R/o 582, A.B. Anand Colony, Baldeobagh, Jabalpur - 482004
(M.P.).
6. R. Amlathe/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri S.N. Amlathe, DOB-20.11.1964,
R/o 1221, PHD-8, Perfect Home, Behind Royal Hospital, Kamla
Nehru Nagar, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
7. R.C. Rai/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Balram Rai, DOB-30.11.1964, R/o
42-A, APR Colony, Katanga, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
8. Laxman Dagore/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Parmanand Dagor, DOB-
15.12.1964, R/o F-131, Opposite High Court, Jabalpur - 482001
(M.P.).
Page 1 of 19
2 OA No.200/898/2011
9. S.S. Saraph/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Sondadu Saraph, DOB-
7.12.1966, R/o 107, Amba Apartment, South Civil Lines, Jabalpur
- 482001 (M.P.).
10. M.I. Khan/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Noor Mohammad DOB-
27.6.1963, R/o 1336/13-A Pragatisheel Colony, Narmada Road,
Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
11. N.K. Dubey/CLI/NKJ, S/o Shri L.P. Dubey, DOB-24.6.1964,
R/o Jain Colony, Nayagaon, New Katni Junctin, Katni - 483501
(M.P.).
12. R.K. Diwedi/CLI/SGO, S/o Shri Ramdass Diwedi, DOB-
10.8.1966, R/o RB-III, 30-A, Chitranjan Railway Colony, Sagar-
470001 (M.P.).
13. C.K. Namdev/CLI/SGO, S/o Shri Haridass Namdev, DOB-
8.7.1963, R/o RB-III, R E Block C Near T R D Depot, Railway
Colony, Sagar - 470001 (M.P.).
14. M.K. Chhalotre/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Laxminarayan, DOB-
31.10.1967, R/o 5 Kachnarkunj, Mahanadda Road, Gupteshwar,
Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
15. S.N. Shukla/CLI/JBP, S/o Shri L.N. Shukla, DOB-18.6.1963,
Add. C/o S.C. Tiwari, 610, Kalakuteer, Amanpur Road, Madan
Mahal, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
16. V.K. Gupta/CLI/ST, S/o Shri C.D. Gupta, DOB 3.11.1964, R/o
Opposite Umri House, Pushpanjali Colony, Warehd Road,
Mukhtiyarganj, Satna - 485001 (M.P.).
17. Nizam Khan/CLI/NKJ, S/o Shri Inayat Khan, DOB -
10.6.1964, R/o Roshan Nagar, SKP Road, In front of Shukla Atta
Chakki, Katni - 483501 (M.P.).
18. A.K. Mishra/CLI/NKJ, S/o Shri S. Mishra, DOB-02.1.1966,
R/o Dr. Praveen Vaishya Gali, Civil Lines, Katni - 483501 (M.P.).
19. A.P. Gupta/CLI/NKJ, S/o Shri Teerath Prasad Gupta, DOB-
24.1.1965, R/o 866, Saidwar Colony, Near New ITI, Roshan
Nagar, New Katni Junction, Katni - 483501 (M.P.).
Page 2 of 19
3 OA No.200/898/2011
20. S.K. Dixit/CLI/NKJ, S/o Shri Lakhanlal Dixit, DOB-11.1.1966,
R/o 87-B, RB III, Diesel Colony, New Katni Junction, Katni -
483501 (M.P.).
21. K.R. Raut/CLI/WCR HQ S/o Shri R.D. Raut, DOB -
16.2.1962, R/o Yashroopkripa, Delite Compound, South Civil
Lines, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
22. Rajeev Agrawal/CLI/WCR HQ S/o Shri K.L. Agrawal, DOB -
14.11.1966, R/o A-14, Kuchani Parishar, Besides Metro Hospital,
Damoh Naka, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
23. C.B. Tiwari/Retd. CLI/JBP, S/o Shri P.N. Tiwari, DOB-
03.8.1950, R/o 678, Amanpur, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
24. Amar Singh/Retd. CLI/JBP, S/o Shri Shanker Singh, DOB -
10.3.1951, R/o T.C. Colony, Zidas College Road, Tilhar, Jabalpur
- 482001 (M.P.).
-Applicants
(By Advocate - Shri S.K. Nandy)
Versus
1. Union of India through its Secretary, Railway Board, Rail
Bhawan, New Delhi 110001.
2. General Manager, Of West Central Railway, Indira Market,
Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
3. Chief Personnel Officer, Head Quarter, West Central Railway,
Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.).
4. Divisional Railway Manager (P), West Central Railway,
Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur - 482001 (M.P.)
- Respondents
(By Advocate - Shri Vijay Tripathi)
(Date of reserving order : 26.02.2018)
Page 3 of 19
4 OA No.200/898/2011
ORDER
By Ramesh Singh Thakur, JM.
The applicants are aggrieved by the order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure A-1), whereby their representation in regard to stepping up of pay, at par with their juniors, has been rejected.
2. The applicants have sought for the following reliefs:
"7.(i) Summon the entire relevant records pertaining to the controversy involved in the present case from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal;
(ii) Command the respondents to extend the benefits of the judgment passed in OA No.1002/2010 by the Erranakulam Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal;
(iii) Upon holding that action of the respondents authorities in declining the claim of the applicants is bad in law, set aside the order dated 7.9.2011 Annexure A/1;
(iv) Command the respondents to implement the guidelines issued by RB No.236/09 dated 24.7.2009 Annexure A/5 read with RB No.69/07 dated 1.5.2007 Annexure A/7 and CPOs letter dated 5/6.5.2010 Annexure A/10 and 01.2.2011 Annexure A/15 read with RB Letter dated 14.12.2010 Annexure A/14;
(v) Also command the respondents to step up of the pay of the applicants who are senior at par with their respective junior employees as mentioned in chart 1,2 & 3 Annexure A/4 with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay and interest arising thereto;
(vi) Further command the respondents to step up the pay of applicant Nos.23 & 24 from the date their junior Shri P.K. Tripathi who is getting more pay than them and accordingly revised their pensionary benefits including pension with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay;Page 4 of 19 5 OA No.200/898/2011
(vii) Award cost of the litigation to the applicant."
3. Precisely, the case of the applicants, as submitted by them, are that they were appointed in Loco Running Staff and holding the post of Fireman-I/Assistant Loco Pilot in the respondent department. Prior to 1.1.2006, the Loco Running Staff cadre comprised of the posts namely; Fireman/Assistant Loco Pilot, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot, Loco Pilot Shunting, Senior Loco Pilot Shunting, Loco Pilot Goods, Senior Loco Pilot Goods, Loco Pilot Passenger, Senior Loco Pilot Passenger, Loco Pilot Mail/Express. All the categories of Loco Pilots in Loco Running Staff cadre are having their normal channel of promotion upto the post of Loco Pilot Mail. So, they have an opportunity to face general selection and get selected to higher post of Chief Loco Inspector in the cadre of Loco Running Supervisor. On promotion to the post of Loco Inspector from the feeder post of Loco Pilot Goods, Loco Pilot Passenger or Loco Pilot Mail, they are entitled to get benefit of pay fixation by adding 30% pay element.
3.1 The Railways has accepted the recommendation of 6th Pay Commission vide Gazette notification dated 04.09.2008 (Annexure A-3) circulated through RBE No.103/2008. As per the proviso to Article 309 of Constitution of India, GSR 643 (E), the Railway Page 5 of 19 6 OA No.200/898/2011 service revised pay rules, 2008 has been formulated. Thus, after acceptance of implementation of 6th Pay Commission, pay of the applicants was also fixed in the revised pay structure. The applicants appointed prior to 1.1.2006 as Loco Inspectors in the pre-revised pay scaled. However, they are drawing less pay than their juniors, who appointed as Loco Running Supervisor after 1.1.2006.
3.2 The applicants feeling aggrieved with this anomaly, have preferred a detailed representation dated 17.04.2011 (Annexure A-
16). Since, no decision was taken by the respondents, the applicants have filed OA No.470/2011 before this Tribunal, which was disposed of vide order dated 31.05.2011 (Annexure A-17) with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the applicants within a period of 90 days from the receipt of the order. In compliance thereof, the respondents have passed the order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure A-1) rejecting the claim of the applicants for grant of stepping up of pay by placing reliance on Note 10 below Rule 7 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008, which says that the pre- revised scale of pay and the revised grade pay of the lower and higher posts in which they are entitled to draw pay should be identical.
Page 6 of 19 7 OA No.200/898/2011
4. The main ground of challenging the impugned order is that the entire action of the respondents is arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and discriminatory in nature as the other several Railway Zones have already extended the benefit of stepping up of pay to similarly situated Loco Inspectors, who were getting less pay than their juniors. Secondly, the respondents have erred in law in differentiating the cadre of Loco Running Staff. The applicants are entitled for stepping up of pay as per the provisions of Rule 1316 (FR 22-C).
5. The respondents have filed their reply. It has been submitted in the preliminary submissions that running staff, who are directly involved in the running of trains includes Drivers, Guards, Diesel Assistants and Shunters working in different grades. At present, the designation of Drivers has been changed as Loco Pilots. A special feature relating to running staff is that a portion of their emoluments is dependent upon the nature of duties performed and the quantum of work put in by them during the month. The quantum of running allowance earned by the running staff is determined mainly by the actual distance worked by them. The highest scale of pay admissible in the cadre of running staff to Mail/Express Direvers in the 3rd CPC scales of pay was Rs.550- Page 7 of 19 8 OA No.200/898/2011 750, the replacement scale of which in the 4th CPC and 5th CPC scales of pay was Rs.1640-2900 and Rs.6000-9800 respectively. In the 6th CPC pay scales, the replacement scale is Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay Rs.4200/-.
5.1 The Loco Pilots are also eligible for selection to the posts of Loco Supervisors, which is a non-running post, on option basis. All the applicants, at one time, were holding the running post of Driver Grade 'C' (Loco Pilot Goods) along with Shri P.K. Tripathi, Mohd Yusuf and I.S. Chaturvedi. The applicants, during 1987-1992, opted for selection as Loco Supervisors, when they were working only as Driver Grade 'C', whereas, Shri P.K. Tripathi continued to work as Driver Grade 'C'. Shri P.K. Tripathi was senior to applicants Nos.3 to 9, 12, 14 & 16 to 20 as Driver Grade 'C' and as Diesel Assistant. Shri P.K. Tripathi opted for the post of Loco Supervisor when he had earned promotion up to Loco Pilot (Mail) on 30.07.2009. So, the pay of the applicants was fixed as Loco Supervisor from the date they were promoted, by adding 30% of their basic pay. Similarly, the pay of Shri P.K. Tripathi was also fixed as Loco Supervisor in 2009 by adding 30% of his basic pay, which he was drawing as Loco Pilot (Mail) in the 6th CPC scale. On introduction of the revised pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the Page 8 of 19 9 OA No.200/898/2011 30% addition in the pay element of the running allowance is increased, which resulted in higher fixation of pay of those Loco Supervisors, who were promoted after 01.01.2006 than those appointed as Loco Supervisor before 01.01.2006. Snice Shri P.K. Tripathi was a Loco Pilot (Mail) in the 6th CPC scale, his pay was corrected fixed in 6th CPC scale, whereas, all the applicants were selected from the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) as Loco Supervisor in the 4th CPC scale, they pay was fixed under the 4th CPC scales. Therefore, the applicants cannot claim their fixation with an employee, whose pay was fixed in 6th CPC scale.
5.2 It has been further submitted by the respondents that the applicants do not fulfill all conditions of stepping up of pay, as contained in President's Decision No.9 under Rule 1316 of Indian Railway Establishment Code Vol.-II (Annexure R-2). The Railway Board, in its letter dated 24.07.2009, has clearly stated that stepping up of pay is permissible only if both the junior and the senior belong to the same cadre and the posts in which they have been promoted should be identical in the same cadre and other conditions as enumerated in Note 10 of Rule 7 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008 should also be fulfilled. Further, the Railway Board, in its Page 9 of 19 10 OA No.200/898/2011 letter dated 28.11.2011, has again reiterated the conditions of stepping up of pay to Loco Inspectors with respect to their juniors. 5.3 The respondents have also submitted that the issue of stepping up of pay of such Loco Supervisors, has already been decicded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others vs. O.P. Saxena, 1997 SCC (L&S) 1667, which has been subsequently followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1022 of 2001 on its judgment dated 13.01.2005 in the case of Surendra Kumar vs. Union of India and others. 5.4 The respondents have averred that Annexure A-1 order has been passed in compliance of the orders passed by this Tribunal in OA No.470/2011. The impugned order is well reasoned and speaking order based on the rules of stepping up of pay of seniors due to anomaly, if any. The applicants are not entitled for stepping up of pay because they do not fulfill essential conditions laid down in Rule 1316 of IREC Vol.-II and in various letters issued by the Railway Board in this respect. All the applicants were promoted as Loco Supervisor when they were only Driver Grade-C in the 4th CPC scales, whereas, Shri P.K. Tripathi was promoted as Loco Supervisor on 30.07.2009 from the post of Mail Driver of higher grade of 6th CPC.
Page 10 of 19 11 OA No.200/898/2011
6. The applicants have filed the rejoinder and have reiterated their stand taken in the O.A. They have submitted that a similar issue has been dealt with by the coordinate Ernakulam Bench in OA No.1002/2010 on 04.10.2011 (Annexure A-24 of the O.A), wherein the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.P. Saxena (supra), has been considered by the Ernakulam Bench.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have perused the pleadings and documents available on record.
8. The contention of the applicants are that they were appointed in Loco Running Staff and holding the post of Fireman-I/Assistant Loco Pilot in the respondent department. Prior to 1.1.2006, all the categories of Loco Pilot in Loco Running Staff cadre are having their normal channel of promotion up to the post of Loco Pilot Mail. Thereafter, they have an opportunity to face general selection to the higher post of Chief Loco Inspector in the cadre of Loco Running Supervisor. So, on promotion to the post of Loco Inspector from the feeder post of Loco Pilot Goods, Loco Pilot Passenger or Loco Pilot Mail, they are entitled to get benefit of pay fixation by adding 30% pay element. But, after acceptance of recommendations of 6th CPC, the applicants were fixed in the Page 11 of 19 12 OA No.200/898/2011 revised pay structure. The grievance of the applicants is that they were appointed prior to 01.01.2006 as Loco Inspector in the pre- revised scale, but they are drawing less pay than their juniors, who were appointed as Loco Inspector after 01.01.2006.
9. On the other side, the respondents have submitted that earlier the Running Staff, who were directly involved in running of the train, includes Drivers, Guards, Diesel Assistants and Shunters working in different grades. At present, the designation of Drivers has been changed as Loco Pilots. The highest scale of pay admissible in the cadre of Running Staff to Mail/Express Drivers in the 3rd CPC scales of pay was Rs.550-750, the replacements scale of which in the 4th CPC and 5th CPC scales of pay was Rs.1640- 2900 and Rs.6000-9800 respectively. In the 6th CPC pay scales, the replacement scale of the said cadre is Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay Rs.4200/-. The Loco Pilots are eligible for selection to the posts of Loco Supervisors, which is a non-running post, on option basis. All the applicants, at one time, were holding the running post of Driver Grade 'C' (Loco Pilot Goods). The applicants, during 1987-1992, opted for selection as Loco Supervisors, when they were working only as Driver Grade 'C'. Therefore, pay of the Page 12 of 19 13 OA No.200/898/2011 applicants was fixed as Loco Supervisor from the date when they were promoted, by adding 30% of their basic pay.
10. On introduction of revised pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the 30% addition in the pay element of the running allowance has been increased, which resulted in higher fixation of pay of those Loco Supervisors, who were promoted after 01.01.2006 than those appointed as Loco Supervisor before 01.01.2006. The stand of the respondents is that the applicants do not fulfill all the conditions of stepping up of pay, as contained in President's Decision No.9 under Rule 1316 of IREC Vol.-II. Moreover, it has been submitted that stepping up of pay is permissible only if both the junior and the senior belong to the same cadre and the posts in which they have been promoted should be identical in the same cadre. The Railway Board, in its letter dated 28.11.2011, has laid down the conditions of stepping up of pay to Loco Inspectors in respect of their juniors. It was also submitted that this issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.P. Saxena (supra).
11. Per contra, learned counsel for the applicants brought to our attention that the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.P. Saxena (supra) has been considered by the coordinate Page 13 of 19 14 OA No.200/898/2011 Ernakulam Bench in OA No.1002/2010 vide order dated 04.10.2011 (Karunakaran A.V. & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.) and the present case fully covers the issue as was before the Ernakulam Bench. Further, the coordinate Bench at Madras in Original Applications No.455/2011, decided on 07.08.2012 (V. Murugesan and Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.), has also followed the orders passed by the Ernakulam Bench, which has been subsequently affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in Writ Petition Nos.3528 and 3529 of 2013 vide order dated 19.02.2013. Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 4568-4569/2014 has dismissed the appeal on 23.02.2016, which was preferred by the respondents therein. The ratio laid down by the Ernakulam Bench was also relied upon by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in its order dated 24.10.2011 in OA No.3857/2010. In Original Application No.2675/2011, the Principal Bench has further followed the decision rendered in OA No.3857/2010.
12. All the applicants in above cited judgment were senior in the cadre. However, their pay was fixed at the lower grade in comparison to their junior persons.
Page 14 of 19 15 OA No.200/898/2011
13. In the present case, the respondents have rejected the claim of the applicants vide order dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure A-1) by placing reliance on Note 10 below Rule 7 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008. The Principal Bench at New Delhi in OA No.3857/2010 has discussed this issue in detail, which is similar in nature. The relevant paragraphs of the order, reads as under:
"2. It has been decided that the anomaly may be resolved by granting stepping up of pay in pay band to the seniors at par with the juniors in terms of Note 10 below Rule 7 of RS(RP) Rules, 2008.
3. The benefit of stepping up of pay in pay band will be subject to the following conditions :-
(a) Both the junior and the senior Railway servants should belong to the same cadre and the posts in which they have been promoted should be identical in the same cadre and other conditions enumerated in Note 10 below Rule 7 of RS(RP) Rules, 2008 should also be fulfilled.
(b) The stepping up of pay will be allowed to running staff only appointed as Loco Supervisors in whose cases 30% of basic pay is taken as pay element in the running allowance. The stepping up of pay will not be admissible to the non running staff of Mechanical Deptt. appointed as Loco Running Supervisors as in their cases the question of pay element in the running allowance does not arise;
(c) If even in the lower post, revised or pre-revised, the junior was drawing more pay than the senior by virtue of advance increments granted to him or otherwise, stepping up will not be permissible;
(d) Stepping up will be allowed only once, the pay so fixed after stepping up will remain unchanged.
xxxx
4. Accordingly, the respondent authority considered the cases of stepping up of pay of a number of employees but rejected the Page 15 of 19 16 OA No.200/898/2011 claim of the applicant on the ground that his case is not covered in terms of the conditions prescribed in Note No. 10 (a) & (b) of Rule-7 of Railway Servants (RS)(Revised Pay)(RP Rules, 2008. The impugned order has stated only two conditions:-
(a) that both the junior and senior railway servants should belong to the same cadre and the posts to which they had been promoted should be identical in that cadre;
(b) the pre-revised scale of pay and the revised grade pay of the lower and higher posts in which they are entitled to draw pay should be identical. Although not specifically mentioned in the impugned order, it has to be inferred that the claim of the applicant was rejected on the ground that he and his junior were not drawing pay in the identical pre-revised pay scale of the power post when both of them belonged to the same cadre and the posts to which they have been promoted are identical in that Cadre.
9. The impugned order has been passed in terms of conditions (a) & (b) of the aforesaid Note-10 below Rule-7 of RS(RP) Rules, 2008. It has failed to consider Condition No.(c). The Conditions stated in the aforesaid Rule are as follows:-
"(a) both the junior and senior Government servants should belong to the same cadre and the posts in which they have been promoted should be identical in the same cadre.
(b) the pre-revised scale of pay and the revised grade pay of the lower and higher posts in which they are entitled to draw pay should be identical.
(c) the senior Government servants at the time of promotion should have been drawing equal or more pay than the junior.
(d) the anomaly should be directed as a result of the application of the provisions of Fundamental rule 22 or any other rule or order regulating pay fixation on such promotion in the revised pay structure. If even in the lower post, the junior officer was drawing more pay in the Page 16 of 19 17 OA No.200/898/2011 pre-revised scale than the senior by virtue of any advance increments granted to him, provision of this Note need not be invoked to step up the pay of the senior officer."
Condition (c) says that the senior government servant at the time of promotion should have been drawing equal or more pay than the junior. There is no doubt that at the time of promotion of Shri Sharma the applicant was drawing more pay than Shri Sharma. Therefore, Condition No. (c) not (b) will be applicable in his case. In other words, he would be eligible for the benefit of stepping up of pay in terms of provision of Note-10 conditions (a) & (c) stipulated below the aforesaid Rule-7"
In the above case, the Principal Bench has come to the conclusion that condition No.(c) not (b) will be applicable in that case and the applicants were held to be eligible for benefit of stepping of pay in terms of provision of Note-10 conditions (a) & (c) stipulated below Rule-7 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008.
14. In the instant case, the applicants in spite of being senior to Shri P.K. Tripathi, are getting lesser pay than him. This anomaly has arisen due to the fact that the applicants have been appointed on the post of Loco Inspector prior to 01.01.2006. In the impugned order (Annexure A-1), the respondents have relied upon the circular dated 24.07.2009, which has been dealt in para 8 of the orders passed by the Principal Bench in OA 3857/2010. The same reads as under:
"8. As regards the Circular dated 24.07.2009 is concerned, it prohibits stepping up of pay only in respect of Members of non-Page 17 of 19 18 OA No.200/898/2011
running staff of Mechanical Department because they never had the benefit of 30% of running allowance at the time of fixation of their pay. The applicant is not a member of Mechanical Department; admittedly, he was a member of the running staff prior to his promotion to the post of Loco Inspector."
15. Moreover, the case of O.P. Saxena (supra), as relied upon by the respondents, has been discussed by the coordinate Bench at Ernakulam in OA No.1002/2010.
16. It is an admitted fact that the applicants were appointed as Loco Inspector between 1987-1992, whereas Shri P.K. Tripathi was appointed on the post of Loco Inspector on 30.07.2009 and they are getting lesser pay than Shri P.K. Tripathi in spite of being senior to him, the fact, which is established by Annexure A-4 detailed chart filed by the applicants. Hence, the issue involved in the present case, has already been discussed by the coordinate Bench at Ernakulam in OA No.1002/2010 and the ratio of the said judgment has been followed by various coordinate Benches and the same has also attained finality. Therefore, the applicants are also entitled for the similar relief as has been extended to the applicants before the coordinate Benches at Ernakulam, Madras and the Principal Bench.
17. In view of the above, this Original Application is allowed. The impugned order at Annexure A-1 is quashed and set aside. The Page 18 of 19 19 OA No.200/898/2011 respondents are directed to pass suitable orders for stepping up the pay of the applicants at par with that of their juniors including as mentioned in Annexure A-4 with all consequential benefits. This exercise shall be completed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs.
(Ramesh Singh Thakur) (Navin Tandon)
Judicial Member Administrative Member
am/-
Page 19 of 19