The Deputy Director General (E) vs Dr P.R Hareendra Sarma on 2 December, 2024

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

The Deputy Director General (E) vs Dr P.R Hareendra Sarma on 2 December, 2024

This OP(CAT) is preferred against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A.No.233/2016 dated 08.09.2023. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the Original Application. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents in the OA preferred this Original Petition.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of this Original Petition in brief are as follows:

The applicant Sri.Hareendra Sarma approached the Tribunal seeking the following reliefs:

i. Direct the respondents to consider granting the Grade Pay in PB-3 with GP of Rs. 5400/- on grant of first financial upgradation under MACP;

ii. Direct the respondents to consider regularly posting the applicant as Hindi Officers/Assistant Director (O.L), in view of his qualification and entitlement under the Recruitment Rules;

iii. Direct the respondents to sanction appropriate wages for working as Hindi Officer (In charge)/Assistant Director (O.L)(in Charge) i.e, GP of Rs. 5400/- in PB-3. OP(CAT) 170/2024 3 2024:KER:92363

3. The case of the applicant before the Tribunal was that the applicant entered in the service of Doordarshan as Hindi Translator on 10.12.2001 and has been working as Hindi Officer/Assistant Director (O.L) In-Charge in Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram since 19.09.2012.

4. While the applicant was paid grade pay of Rs.4600/- in PB-2, his colleagues who joined on deputation as Hindi Officers/Assistant Director (O.L) were paid grade pay of Rs.5400/- in PB-3. The applicant was granted grade pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006 on the implementation of the 6th CPC recommendation. On completion of ten years, the applicant was sanctioned first Modified Assurance Career Progression (MACP) with effect from 10.12.2011. But was granted the very same grade pay of Rs.4600/- in PB-2 that he was drawing ever since 01.01.2006.

5. The petitioners herein/respondents in the OA contended that, though the applicant was appointed in the scale of pay Rs.5000-8000/-, the grade pay of which was Rs.4200/-. He was granted grade pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006 which needs rectification. The petitioners contended that the applicant is eligible to grade pay of Rs.4600/- only on granting first MACP with effect from OP(CAT) 170/2024 4 2024:KER:92363 10.12.2011 but the applicant was drawing same grade pay on 01.01.2006 due to erroneous fixation of pay.

6. The Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram is sanctioned with only one post of Hindi Translator. No post of Hindi Officer has been sanctioned for Doordarshan Kendra. The applicant who was initially appointed as Hindi Translator was directed to function as Hindi Officer (I/C) on re-designation of Hindi Officer's post as Assistant Director (O/L).

7. We have heard Adv.K.S.Prenjith Kumar, Central Government Counsel for the petitioners and Adv.Vishnu S. Champazhanthiyil, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

8. The main issue in this OP(CAT) is whether Hindi Translators are entitled to grade pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006.

9. It is submitted that the issue was covered against the petitioners in a Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A.Nos.656/2012 and 953/2012 holding that Hindi Translators are entitled to grade pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006. The said orders were confirmed by this Court in OP(CAT) 170/2024 5 2024:KER:92363 O.P.No.142/2014 and later the Honourable Apex Court in SLP No.23053/2016.

10. The Central Administrative Tribunal allowed the Original Application as per order dated 08.09.2023 granting the applicant grade pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006. The relevant paragraphs of the order are extracted hereunder:

"Moreover, it is the definite case of the applicant that this question was considered earlier on numerous occasions and once the matter was referred to a Full Bench of this Tribunal in O.A Nos.656/12 and 953/12 and the Full Bench held that persons similarly placed are entitled to get Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-.

Paragraphs 21 and 22 of the order of the Full Bench reads thus:

"21. Thus, it has to be accepted that the question, as to whether the JHTs are entitled for Grade pay of Rs. 4,600/- on the basis of the OM dated 13.11.2009 was answered positively in OA No. 107/2011 and was confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court in OP (CAT) No. 467 of 2012.

22. In the circumstances, the reference as to whether JHTs in the subordinate offices of the Central Government are entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 4,600/- from 1.1.2006 on the basis of OM dated 13.11.2009 or not has to be held to be in favour of the applicants and in the circumstances of the case there is no necessity of again referring the matter to the Division Bench for deciding the matter on facts. We hold that both the OAs are liable to be allowed and the same are accordingly allowed."

OP(CAT) 170/2024 6 2024:KER:92363

14. As stated by the applicant, this was agitated before the Hon'ble High Court and the High Court confirmed the same. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP and therefore, the question is no more res integra."

In the light of the above discussion, we are of the view that reasoning of the Tribunal is based on appreciation of facts, documents and orders, thus do not require interference. Therefore, OP(CAT)No.170/2024 is dismissed.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE Sd/-

K. V. JAYAKUMAR JUDGE Sbna OP(CAT) 170/2024 7 2024:KER:92363 APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 170/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO.

8(1)2012/A1/DKT(PRHS) DATED 19.09.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.14/1/2011KARMA-2(A)3-S DATED 04.01.2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.8(1)2012/A1/DKT(PRHS) DATED 16.01.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.1(5)(3)2009-A1(DKT DATED 23.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F.NO.27/2/2010-S-II(A) 1742 DATED 05.09.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.12.2011 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL ALL INDIA RADIO ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.01.2014 TO THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 29.12.2015 TO THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.01.2016 TO THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN Annexure R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE OM NO. 1/1/2008-IC DATED 13.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE Annexure R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF CCS(RP) RULES, 2008 OP(CAT) 170/2024 8 2024:KER:92363 Annexure A10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. 23/01/2009- S-VI/78-1096 DATED 20.08.2009 ISSUED BY THE PRASAR BHARATI DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF AKASHVANI Annexure A11 TRUE COPY OF THE OM F.NO.1/1/2008-IC DATED 13.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE Annexure A12 TRUE COPY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ORDER CONTAINED IN RESOLUTION DATED 13.03.2017 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION Annexure A13 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION F.NO.31/3/2020- SII(A)/85 DATED 04.02.2021 ISSUED BY PRASAR BHARATI, BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA ALONG WITH LEGIBLE COPY Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION O.A.NO.

180/00233/2016 DATED 28.02.2016 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A.NO.

180/00233/2016 DATED 14.10.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF REJOINDER FILED, BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN IN OA NO. 233 OF 2016 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 08.09.2023 IN O.A.NO. 180/00233/2016 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, EMAKULAM BENCH

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court