Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Ps Negi vs Council Of Scientific And Industrial ... on 3 February, 2025
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
O.A. No. 60/130/2025
Chandigarh, this the 3rd day of February, 2025
HON'BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)
P.S. Negi, Aged 64 years, S/o Late Sh. G.S. Negi, Ex-Senior Technical
Officer (3) in Group-III(6) grade, O/o CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments
Organisation, Chandigarh, R/o House No. 1958, Sector-21, Panchkula.
...Applicant
(BY ADVOCATE: Mr. Sandeep Siwatch)
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Director General, Council of Scientific & Industrial
Research (CSIR), Anusandhan Bhawan, 2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110001,
and Ex-Officio Secretary, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research
(DSIR), Govt. of India.
2. President, Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR), Prime
Minister's Office, South Block, 152, Raisina Hill, New Delhi-110011.
3. Director, CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments Organisation (CSIO),
Sector-30, Chandigarh-160030.
...Respondents
(BY ADVOCATE: Mr. I. S. Sidhu, on advance notice)
O R D E R(Oral)
Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J):
1. The applicant has filed this instant O.A under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:
"1. Direct the Respondents to decide the representations dated 01.02.2023, 29.09.2023, 08.02.2024, 12.02.2024, 24.04.2024 and 22.07.2024 [Annexure A-16 (colly)] by passing reasoned and speaking order by taking note of the letter dated 27.02.2020 sent by the Employer of the Applicant i.e. the Director, CSIO, Chandigarh (i.e. Respondent No.3) as a reminder to CSIR letter dated 09.10.2019 to clearly define and confirm the lowest scientist level parallel grade in the ladder of Group-III which was to be considered as M.Com degree entry grade in Group-III for PME Cell and as per CSIR directive as issued vide letter No.17/65/P-42A/12/90-PPS dated 02.03.1993 which reiterated equivalence of M.Com degree to M.Sc for PME Cell 2 in Group-III (i.e. to confirm the qualification entry grade in the ladder of Group-III), within a time bound manner, which was neither implemented by CSIO Administration nor any clarification sought by it from CSIR at any stage till date."
2. The brief facts of the case as pleaded are that the applicant appointed as Workshop Assistant in Group - II(1) grade on 17.07.1979 in the respondent's department. He acquired B.Com degree in the year 1986 and M.Com degree in the year 1989 and was last promoted to the post of Senior Technical Officer (3) in Group - III (6) grade w.e.f. 03.05.2016 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.2020.
3. The CSIR in November 1982 released New Recruitment & Assessment Scheme (NRAS) for its S&T Staff which was implemented w.e.f 01.02.1981 to 31.03.1988 and all the staff were broadly covered under 4-Groups: Group - IV (Scientific), Group - III (Technical) and Group - II and Group - I (Support Staff). In May 1984, CSIR issued guidelines regarding introduction of Project Budgeting and Cost Accounting in CSIR Laboratories/Institutes and as per its Point No.2.1.2(b), M.Com degree was treated as equivalent to M.Sc for recruitment of Scientists in PME Cell. The applicant was called for interview to the post of Scientist - B (Planning & Industrial Liaison) at Group - IV(1).
4. The contention of the applicant is that he was offered entry grade at Lower Group-III instead of Scientist - B (Planning & Industiral Liaison) at Group - IV, since in the MANAS Scheme, which replaced NRAS Scheme on 12.09.1990, Scientists was added in Group III in para 7.12. The applicant then represented the respondents in this regard. He submitted representations to CSIR (i.e., Respondent No.1) dated 29.09.2023, 08.02.2024, 12.02.2024, 24.04.2024 and 3 22.07.2024 for re-consideration of administrative review (Annexure A-16) which has not been replied by CSIR till now.
5. At this stage learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant will be satisfied if the respondent No.1 be directed to take a decision on his representations (Annexure A-16) in a time bound manner to which Mr. I. S. Sidhu, Adv, on advance notice, appeared and submitted that the respondents have no objection in considering the representation of applicant in a time bound manner.
6. In view of the aforesaid, without going into the merits of the case, the O.A is disposed of at the admission stage itself with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the representation of the applicant dated 22.07.2024 (Annexure A-16) and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the same as per Rules, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
(SURESH KUMAR BATRA) Member (J) bp