Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shri Suraj Bhan Sharma (Plate Maker) vs Union Of India on 18 December, 2009
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH O.A. NO.1618 of 2009 M.A. No.1079 of 2009 NEW DELHI, THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 HONBLE Shri Shailendra Pandey, MEMBER (A) HONBLE DR. DHARAM PAUL SHARMA, MEMBER (J) 1. Shri Suraj Bhan Sharma (Plate Maker) Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. 2. Shri Vijay Kumar Rajput (Plate Maker) Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. 3. Shri Narotam Singh (Plate Maker) Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. 4. Shri Mahender Kumar (Plate Maker) Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. ..APPLICANTS (BY ADVOCATE : Shri D.R. Gupta) VERSUS 1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110001. 2. The Director of Printing, Ministry of Urban Development, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110001. 3. Manager (Admn) Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. .RESPONDENTS. (BY ADVOCATE : Shri Krishan Kumar) ORDER (ORAL) SHRI Shailendra Pandey, MEMBER (A) :
The applicants herein are Plate Makers working in the cadre of Govt. of India Press, Minto Road, New Delhi and had been granted upgradation under the relevant ACP Scheme vide respondents order dated 18.7.2005 from various dates in 2004 as indicated in the said order. Suddenly on 21.5.2009, the respondents issued order (Annexure A/1) stating that the applicants, who had been granted ACP upgradation, pay has been refixed as under:-
Last Pay drawn on the date of grant of ACP (i.e. 16.10.2004) in the Scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 Pay fixed in the VIth Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in the scale of Rs.5200-20200 + GP Rs.2400/-
1. Shri Suraj Bhan Sharma, Plate Maker 1.3.04 to 28.02.05 Rs.4900 1.3.05 to 28.2.06 Rs.5000 Rs.5000 as on 1.1.06 9300+2400=11700 360 1.7.06 9660+2400=12060 370 1.7.07 10030+2400=12430 380 1.7.08 10410+2400=12810
2. Shri Vijay Kumar Rajput, Plate Maker 1.3.04 to 28.02.05 Rs.4900 1.3.05 to 28.2.06 Rs.5000 Rs.5000 as on 1.1.06 9300+2400=11700 360 1.7.06 9660+2400=12060 370 1.7.07 10030+2400=12430 380 1.7.08 10410+2400=12810
3. Shri Narotam Singh, Plate Maker 1.3.04 to 28.02.05 Rs.4900 1.3.05 to 28.2.06 Rs.5000 Rs.5000 as on 1.1.06 9300+2400=11700 360 1.7.06 9660+2400=12060 370 1.7.07 10030+2400=12430 380 1.7.08 10410+2400=12810
4. Shri Mahender Kumar, Plate Maker 1.6.03 to 31.5.04 Rs.4700 1.6.04 to 30.05.05 Rs.4800 1.6.05 to 31.05.06 Rs.4900 Rs.4900 as on 1.1.06 9120+2400=11520 350 1.7.06 9470+2400=11870 360 1.7.07 9830+2400=12230 370 1.7.08 10200+2400=12600 The effect of this order was withdrawal of the benefits granted under ACP to them which they had been enjoying w.e.f. 16.10.2004 vide order dated 18.7.2005.
2. It has been stated by the respondents that in accordance with the guidelines for the grant of financial benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme, the persons redeployed in higher grade are to be treated as direct recruit and past service rendered by them in lower grade is not to be reckoned for the purpose of grant of benefit under ACP Scheme. However, the applicants to the OA were erroneously granted benefit of 2nd financial upgradation in the year 2004 after taking into account service rendered by them in the grade of Compositor Grade II. As a result of erroneous grant of benefit of 2nd financial upgradation, the applicant were drawing higher pay than their seniors who represented for stepping up of their pay with reference to the applicants. The matter was examined and the clerical mistake of grant of 2nd financial upgradation to the applicant was detected. The mistake was rectified while fixing their pay vide Office Order dated 21st May, 20089 (A-1 to OA) in implementation of recommendations made by 6th Pay Commission as accepted by the Government.
3. It is seen that this order was issued without informing the applicants of even the reasons as to why benefits granted to them and enjoyed by them for over 4 years were suddenly being withdrawn. As the applicants had been given these benefits vide respondents order as mentioned above without any misrepresentation on the part of the applicant, the principles of natural justice would require that they should at least be given an opportunity by putting them to notice before withdrawing the benefits if otherwise not warranted under the Rules.
4. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.05.2009, operation of which was stayed by the Tribunal, is quashed and set aside. The respondents would be at liberty to proceed in the matter in accordance with law.
5. With the above directions, the OA stands disposed of. No costs.
(Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma) (Shailendra Pandey) Member (J) Member (A) /ravi/