Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
V Pappachan vs Union Of India on 27 November, 2013
1 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATIONS No.: 589/2012, 398/2012, 234/2012, 233/2012, 244/2012, 293/2012 Date of decision : 27 November 2013 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, MEMBER (A) HON'BLE SHRI A.J. ROHEE, MEMBER (J) 589/2012 V Pappachan House No. 208/C, Vasudha Housing Colony, Bombolin Complex Post, Goa 403202 ... Applicant 398/2012 1. Uttam Keru Hirve JCO's House No. 4/1, NDA Khadakwasla, Pune 411 023. 2. B. Hemachandran Nair 24/1 Lalita Niwas, Dynesh Housing Society, Warje Malwadi, Pune 411 058. 3. Lalit Mehta Flat No. 3, 'G' Wing, Vinayak Apartment, Shinde Nagar, NDA Road, Bhavdan, Pune 411 021. ... Applicants 234/2012 1. Avinash H. Salvi Building No. 01, Flat No. 08, Soba Puram, Warje, Bombay Bangalore Highway, Pune 411 058 2 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP 2. S.N. Chakrabarthi 49/1/252/9, Sangam Nagar, Sangvi, Pune 411 027. 3. Smt. M.S. Shevade Building No. 17, Flat No. 13, Guruganesh Nagar, Part II, Kothrud, Pune 411 038. 4. N.S. Bawkar 38/580, Lokmanya Nagar, Sadasiv Peth, Pune 411 030. 5. Smt. Inderjeet Kaur Plot No. 161, Room No. 11, Adhar Society, Near Sadhuvaswani Garden, Pimpri, Pune 411 017. ... Applicants 233/2012 1. Jairaj Shyambihari Kanojia Premdeep Building, No C-4, Flat No 302, Premdeep Housing Society, Shanti Nagar, Meera Road East, Mumbai 400 107. 2. Madhusudan Vishwanath Gaikwad, A-504, Chandraprabha Co-operative Society, Udayashree Road, Bhandup East, Mumbai 400 042. 3. Rabinder Pal Singh D201, Parikshit Building, Premium Park, Agashi Road, Virar West, Mumbai 401 303. 4. Mrs Pooja Suresh Nichani P-110/15, Defence Civilian Quarters, Dandi, RC Church, Colaba, Mumbai 400 005. 3 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP 5. Mrs. Sunita Harishchandra Gaikwad T/12 Tower, Kamgar Nagar, Co-Operative Housing Society, Kurla East, Mumbai 400 024 ... Applicants 244/2012 Mrs. Mariamma JijiFlat No.1, Parvati Apartment, Vikas Nagar, Kiwale, Dehu Road, Pune 412 101. ... Applicant (By Advocate Shri P.J. Prasadrao in all the above O.As.) 293/2012 Sunil Ramchandra Bagade, Sadguru Niwas, Chawl No. 36 Room No.2, Jai Hind Nagar, Khar (East), Mumbai-400 051. ... Applicant (By Advocate Shri R.P. Saxena) VERSUS 1. Union of India Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi 110 011. ... Respondents in O.A. Nos. 589/2012, 293/2012, 244/2012, 233/2012, 234/2012, 398/2012 2. Director General of Signals, Sigs 4(C), General Staff Branch, DHQ PO, New Delhi 110 011. ... Respondents in O.A. Nos. 589/2012, 244/2012, 233/2012, 234/2012, 398/2012 4 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP 3. Commandant, Headquarters 2 Signal Training Centre, Pin 900197, C/o 56 APO. ... Respondent in O.A. No. 589/2012 4. Officer-in-Charge, Records Signals Pin 901124, C/o 56 APO. ... Respondents in O.A. Nos. 589/2012, 244/2012, 233/2012, 234/2012, 398/2012 5. The Commandant, 5, Technical Training Regiment (2 STC), Bombolim Camp, Goa 403 201. ... Respondent in O.A. No. 589/2012 6. The Director General Armed Forces Medical Services, Ministry of Defence, 'M' Block, New Delhi 110 001. ... Respondent in O.A. No.293/2012 7. The Commandant Armed Forces Medical Stores Depot, Kandivli (East), Mumbai 400 101. 8. Commandant Station Headquarters, Dehu Road, Pune Pin 900463, C/o 56 APO. 9. Officer Commanding MG&G Area Signal Coy, ... Respondent in O.A. No.293/2012 ... Respondent in O.A. No.244/2012 Colaba, Mumbai 400 005. ... Respondent in O.A. Nos.233/2012 10. Station Headquarters, Kirkee/Aundh, Pin 900 462, C/o 56 APO. ... Respondent in O.A. No.234/2012 5 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP 11. The Commandant National Defence Academy, NDA Post Khadakwasla, Pune 411 023. ... Respondent in O.A. No.398/2012 (By Advocates Shri V.S. Masurkar in O.A. No.244/2012 along with Shri R.R. Shetty in O.A. No.589/2012, Smt. H.P. Shah in O.A. Nos.244/2012, 293/2012, 398/2012, 234/2012, 233/2012, Shri S.G. Pillai in O.A. Nos. 398/2012, 234/2012, 244/2012 and Shri P. Khosla in O.A. Nos.589/2012, 244/2012) O R D E R (Oral) Per: Hon'ble Shri Sudhir Kumar, Member (A)
The facts of these cases lie in a very narrow compass. The applicants of these six cases are civilian employees of the Defence Ministry in the Signals Side. At one point of time, these civilian defence employees had sought applicability of the Post and Telecommunication Department's scheme of Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) and Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) to the Signals Wing employees of the Ministry of Defence also. The matter was taken up before the Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 450/HR/2002 in a case which originated from the State of Haryana, the order in which was passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal on 13.09.2002, a copy of which has not been produced 6 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP before us. But we have been informed that the Chandigarh Bench had ordered for the benefits of the TBOP/BCR Schemes of the Department of Posts and Telecommunications to be made applicable to the Signals Wing civilian employees of the Defence Ministry also. At that point of time, in 2002, already an Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme) was in vogue in the rest of the Government of India Ministries and Departments, by virtue of the recommendations made in this regard by the Vth Pay Commission, which were implemented by the Government of India. Somehow, the employees of the Signals Wing had not sought to be covered by the ACP Scheme, but had instead sought to be covered by the Department of Post and Telecommunication Schemes of TBOP/BCR, which prayer had been allowed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal.
2. Being dissatisfied with this order, in view of the existence of the ACP Scheme already announced by the Government of India in the meanwhile, through its OM No. 35034/1/97-Estt(D) dated August 9, 1999, the respondents had carried the matter before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 7 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP 8759/2002, which came to be disposed of by the Hon'ble High Court, ostensibly upholding the order of the Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal, even though that order of the Hon'ble High Court is also not before us for perusal today. Later the matter was carried by the respondents before the Hon'ble Apex Court also, in SLP CC 143/2004 filed by the Union of India, but the same also was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, by which the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in which the order of Chandigarh Bench had got merged, became final, and the TBOP/BCR Scheme became applicable to the civilian employees of the Signals Wing of the Defence Ministry.
3. Thereafter, after the VIth Pay Commission, the Government of India announced the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme. Many representations were thereafter filed by the employees of the Signals Wing of the Defence Ministry, now pleading for a switch over from the earlier adopted TBOP/BCR Scheme of the Post and Telecommunications Department, ostensibly because after the VI Pay Commission, even the Department of Posts had also adopted the MACP Scheme, and it 8 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP had given up the erstwhile TBOP/BCR Schemes altogether. This switch over was requested by the applicant of O.A. 589/2012 also, through his representation dated 12.05.2011, Annexure A-7 of the O.A. addressed to the Director General of Signals (Sigs 4 (c)), G.S. Branch, IHQ of MOD (Army), DHQ-PO, New Delhi-110011, which was one of the many representations which reached for consideration before the respondent authorities. However, since the Defence Ministry had not yet decided to switch over to the MACP Scheme in respect of the civilian Defence employees, the impugned order at Annexure A-1 dated 29.06.2011 has been issued by the respondent authorities to all the Signals Wings units all over the country.
4. The learned counsel for the applicants pleads that while he is not seeking the two Schemes to run concurrently, and only the new MACP Scheme to be made applicable to the applicants of these six O.As., through their O.M. No. 35011/03/2008-Estt. (D) dated 30.07.2010, the Government of India has actually gone even one step beyond, and has allowed, in partial amendment of para 13 of Annexure-I of the MACP Scheme, for the Staff Car Driver Scheme and the 9 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP MACP Scheme both to run concurrently, which, he submits, is also applicable to the Staff Car Drivers of the Ministry of Defence, who are also civilian defence employees. He, therefore, pleads that the respondents ought to be directed to take another call at their decision communicated through the impugned order at Annexure A-1, and decide the matter afresh in the case of the present applicants also.
5. It is trite law that this Tribunal cannot enter the domain of the administration and decide on the matters of policy, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. T.P. Bombhate : (1991) 3 SCC 11, and State of Tamil Nadu & Anr vs. S. Arumugham & Ors : (1998) 2 SCC 196.
6. The respondents must be feeling compelled to continue to follow the previous findings as contained in the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court rejecting their SLP, and also bound by the orders of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court to continue the applicability of TBOP/BCR Schemes for the civilian Defence employees of the Signals Wing of the Defence Ministry, perhaps on account of the parity with the Postal employees in the 10 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP context of the orders of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal, and the orders of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court as had been earlier passed, as has been submitted before us.
7. But now, after the VIth Central Pay Commission, even the Postal Department has also adopted the MACP Scheme, and has given up the erstwhile TBOP/BCR Schemes. Therefore, it would be in the fitness of things that the respondents do not feel bound down now by the orders earlier passed for parity of Signals civilian employees of Defence Ministry with the Postal employees, as it existed before the MACP Scheme was announced w.e.f. 01.09.2008, and reconsider the mater of policy of extending the parity of MACP Scheme to the Signals employees of the Ministry of Defence also, at par with the employees of Post and Telecommunications Department, when the latter have already been brought under the ambit of the MACP Scheme. Beyond making these observations, we do not feel that the matter is ripe enough for any judicial interference from this Tribunal at this stage and these six O.As. are therefore disposed off with directions to the respondents to re-consider the prayer of the applicants of 11 O.A. No.589/2012 & GROUP these O.As. at the appropriate level of seniority within the respondent department/Ministry. These six O.As., therefore, stand disposed of accordingly.
(A.J. Rohee) (Sudhir Kumar) Member (J) Member (A) sc.