Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
J C Kapoor vs Cabinet Secretariat on 13 January, 2023
1
O.A. No. 554/2020
Item No. 15 (C-5)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 554/2020
This the 13th Day of January, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1. Shri Jagdish Chander Kapoor, Group - B
Age 65 years
S/o Late Shri Qaim Chand Kapoor
Retired on 28.02.2014
As Principal Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o 12/92 Geeta Colony
New Delhi-110031
2. J.R. Nandwani, Group - B
Age 70 Years
S/o Late Dr. G.D. Nandwani
Retired on 31.12.2008
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o Tower 1, Flat No.804
Orchid Petals, Sohna Road
Sector-49, Gurgaon-122018
3. Smt Usha Rikhi, Group - B
Age 70 Years
W/o Late Shri S.C. Rikhi
Retired on 3.01.2009
As Principal Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o C-43, South Extn, Ground Floor
2
O.A. No. 554/2020
Item No. 15 (C-5)
Part II, New Delhi-110049
4. A.D. Manchanda, Group - B
Age 70 Years
S/o Late Shri Gian Chand Manchanda
Retired on 30.11.2008
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o KP-336, Pitampura,
Delhi-110034
5. Raj Kumar Bhatnagar, Group - B
Age 71 Years
S/o Late Bal Raj Bhatnagar
Retired on 30.09.2008
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o Flat No. M-81, Rama Krishna Vihar
29, I.P. Extension, Patparganj,
Delhi-110092
6. H.S. Bhatia, Group - B
Age 69 Years
S/o Late Shri G.S. Bhatia
Retired on 30.11.2010
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o R Block, 60B, Dilshad Garden
Delhi-110095
7. S.K. Goswami, Group - B
Age 70 Years
S/o Late Shri K.B. Goswami
3
O.A. No. 554/2020
Item No. 15 (C-5)
Retired on 31.01.2010
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o Flat No.02, Kailash Apartments
45, I.P. Extension
Delhi-110092
8. Arun Kumar Kalia, Group - B
Age 68 Years
S/o Late Shri S.P. Kalia
Retired on 31.08.2011
As Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o 2754, Ranjit Nagar
South Patel Nagar
New Delhi-110008
9. Krishan Kumar Mutreja, Group - B
Age 66 Years years
S/o Late Shri Lok Nath
Retired on 31.7.2013
As Principal Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o House No. 973, Sector 37, Faridabad
Haryana 121003
10. Satish Kumar Malhotra, Group - B
Age 69 Years
S/o Late Shri Haveli Ram Malhotra
Retired on 31.10.2009
As Principal Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
4
O.A. No. 554/2020
Item No. 15 (C-5)
R/o DB 63A, DDA Flats, Hari Nagar
New Delhi-110064
11. Smt Pushp Lata, Group - B
Age 69 years
W/o Shri S.K. Khera
Retired on 30.09.2010
As Principal Private Secretary
Research & Analysis Wing
Cabinet Secretariat
R/o 87, Inder Enclave, Paschim Vihar
New Delhi-110087
...Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr. Padma Kr. S.)
Versus
Union of India,
Through Secretary (R)
Cabinet Secretariat
Pt Deen Dayal Antyodaya Bhawan
CGO Complex,
New Delhi-110003
....Respondent
(By Advocate : Mr. Hanu Bhaskar)
5
O.A. No. 554/2020
Item No. 15 (C-5)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) The applicants in the present O.A. are aggrieved by order dated 21.10.2019 placed as Annexure A-1 vide which the benefit of financial upgradation to the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600 as third MACP has been denied to them.
2. Ventilating their grievance, they seek the following relief :
(a) Quash and set aside the Order dated 21.10.2019 (ANNEXURE A-1) and declare the action of the respondents to have not released the financial benefit of Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/- as 3rd MACP is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory.
(b) Direct the Respondents release the financial benefit of the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600 as 3rd MACP to the Applicants with consequential arrears of pay and interest thereon.
(c) grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to grant to the applicants under the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. To appreciate the reasons adduced by the respondents while rejecting the prayer of the applicants, it would be appropriate to quote the impugned communication verbatim :
No. 11/11/2013-Pers.6-14346 Government of India Cabinet Secretariat New Delhi, the 21/X/19 To Shri K.K. Mutreja, R/o, House No. 93, Sector-37, 6 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5) Faridabad, Haryana-121003.
Subject : Extension of benefit of financial upgradation to the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/- on completion of 30 years of service as allowed to petitioners in OA No. 1622/2014 filed by Shri V.K. Sharma, Under Secretary & ors Vs. Union of India and in OA No. 3290/2012 filed by Shri G.S. Bhatti & ors vs UoI- representation of non-petitioners rearding.
Sir, Please refer to your letter dated 24.09.2019 on the above cited subject.
2. It is informed that the matter regarding extension of benefit of financial upgradation to the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/- on completion of 30 years of service as allowed to petitioners in OA No. 1622/2014 filed by Shri V.K. Sharma, Under Secretary & ors Vs Union of India and in OA No. 3290/2012 filed by Shri G.S. Bhatti & ors vs UoI to all officers who were similarly placed but were not petitioners in the above mentioned OAs, was referred to DoP&T. They have informed vide ID No. 1385252/19/CR dated 04.09.2019 that the benefit of 3rd MACP in the grade pay fo Rs. 7600/- in PB-3 granted to the applicants of the above mentioned OAs cannot be extended to the non-petitioners who are similarly placed as such judgments are implemented as Case specific, without any precedent value.
Yours faithfully, (Rinku Dasgupta) Under Secretary (Pers. C) Copy to :
1. Shri J.C. Kappor, Ex-PPS, R/o 13/92, Geeta Colony, New Delhi-110031
2. J.R. Nadwani, Ex-PS, R/o Tower-I, Flat No. 804, Orchid Petals, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon-122018.
3. Smt. Usha Rikhi, Ex-PPS, R/o, C-43, South Extension, Ground Floor, Part-II, New Delhi-110049
4. A.D. Manchanda, Ex-PS R/o, KP-336, Pitampura, Delhi-110034
5. Raj Kumar Bhatnagar, Ex-PS, 7 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5) R/o Flat No. M-81, Rama Krishna Vihar-29, IP Extension, Patparganj, Delhi-110092
6. Shri H.S. Bhatia, Ex-PS R/o R-Block, 60-B, Dilshad Garden Delhi-110059
7. Shri S.K. Goswami, Ex-PS, R/o Flat No. 02, Kailash Apartments, Delhi-110092
8. Shri Arund Kumar Kalia, Ex-PS, R/o, 2754, Ranjit Nagar, South Patel Nagar, New Delhi-110008
9. Shri S.K. Malhotra, Ex-PPS, R/o DB-63-A, DDA Flats, Hari Nagar, New Delhi-110064
10. Smt. Pushp Lata, Ex-PPS, R/o 87, Inder Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110087
11. Mrs. Uma Chopra, R/o H.No. 549, Tower No. 7, Hewo-II Society, Sector-56, Gurgaon-122011
12. Shri G.P. Kalra, R/o C3A/3B Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058
13. Shri R.K. Saxena, R/o-A12/602 Tulip Voilet, Sec-69, Gurgaon-122101
14. Mrs. Lalita Malhotra, R/o C4D/50-C, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058
15. Mrs. Devki Rani Joshi, R/o, K-6115, Gaur Green City, Vaibhav Khand, Indrapuram, Shibra Sun City, Ghaziabad-201001
16. R.P. Sharma, Ex-PPS, R/o Flat No. C-1002, Antriksh Nature Apartments, Plot No. A-110, Sector-52, Noida - 201301.
17. Shri K.L. Malhotra, Ex-PPS, R/o 35, Sita Ram Apartments, 102, I.P. Extension, Delhi-110092
18. Smt. Geeta Kumari, Ex-PPS, R/o 1140-P, Sector-21, Gurugram-122016
19. Shri Ravinder Singh, Ex-PPS, 8 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5) R/o WZ-36-C/3, Street No. 7, Krishan Park, P.O. Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110018.
20. Shri N.P.S. Oberoi, Ex-US, R/o 4/32, Ramesh Nagar (SS), New Delhi-110015
21. Mrs. B.K. Sarin, Ex-US, R/o A1A-23A, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058.
22. Mrs. Neeru Abrol, Ex-US, R/o B-106, Sector-41, Noida, U.P.
23. Shri Deepak Kumar, Ex-SO, R/o E-610, Narwara Apartments, Plot No. 89, Patparganj, Delhi-110092
24. Shri Rudra Dutt, Ex-US, R/o D-215, G/F, Sec-17, Konark Enclave, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad-201012.
25. Shri S.S. Yadav, Ex-US, R/o H.No. 777, Sector-13, Pocket-B, Dwarka, New Delhi-110078
4. Learned counsel for the applicants argues that the issue involved in the present O.A. bears striking similarity to the subject of O.A. No. 900/2020 which was decided on 13.04.2021 and this Tribunal had passed the following order :
"6. We have heard the counsels for the parties. We have perused the pleadings on record. It is not in dispute that the applicants are similarly placed as the applicants therein the aforesaid two OAs, namely, OA No.1622/2014, titled as V. K. Sharma & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. and OA No. 3290/2012, titled as G.S. Bhatti and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. It is also not in dispute that the aforesaid Orders/Judgments of this Tribunal in the aforesaid two OAs have attained finality and the same have been given effect to. The only reason as given by the respondents to refuse the benefits of the aforesaid two Orders/Judgments is that the DoP&T has advised that the benefits can be given to the applicants in the aforesaid two OAs only and not to similarly placed persons. Once it 9 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5) is an admitted case that the applicants are similarly placed and the benefits pertain to the grievance of financial benefits under the MACP Scheme and refusal therefore is causing loss to the applicants on month to month basis. Therefore, the argument of learned counsel for the respondents that the applicants have been fence sitters and, therefore, they are not entitled to the reliefs, as sought in the present OA, is not found sustainable in the eyes of law in view of the fact that it is settled law that once an issue has been decided by the competent Court of law, the benefits thereof are required to be extended to all the similarly placed persons and the Government being a model employer is not expected to compel each and every other similarly placed employees to approach the Tribunal/Court. In this regard, we may refer to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inderpal Yadav vs. Union of India & Others, reported in 1985 (2) SLR 2481, the relevant portion of which reads as under:-
".. Therefore, those who could not come to the court need not be at a comparative disadvantage to those who rushed in here. If they are otherwise similarly situated, they are entitled to similar treatment if not by anyone else at the hands of this Court."
Similar position of law has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court further in the case of K.C. Sharma Vs. Union of India, reported in AIR 1997 SC 3588. Reliance is also placed on the law laid down by Hon'ble Five Judges decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.K. Sharma vs. Union of India and others, reported in 1998 (1) (SLJ) SC 35.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and discussions, we find merit in the OA and the same is allowed. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 22.10.2019 & 04.03.2020 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to accord the same benefits to the applicants, as accorded to the applicants in the aforesaid two OAs, namely, OA No.1622/2014, titled as V. K. Sharma & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. and OA No. 3290/2012, titled as G.S. Bhatti and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors., as expeditiously as possible and in 10 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5) any case within twelve weeks of receipt of a copy of this Order. No order as to cost."
5. Learned counsel argues that, as the impugned order indicates the claim of the applicants has not been rejected on its merits but on the limited grounds that the judgments of the courts/ Tribunals cannot be extended to non-petitioners who are similarly placed as such judgments are implemented without any precedent value and in the facts and circumstances of specific cases.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand argues that the applicants cannot claim benefit of the judgment passed with respect to certain other applicants. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of their situation, the present applicants could be termed as fence-sitters; and accordingly being opportunists they do not deserve the extension of the judgment passed in a case specific matter.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents on record. We have carefully studied the order of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 900/2020 from which the learned counsel for the applicant draws support to establish the claim of the applicants. We have no doubt in our mind that the facts and the issues involved are identical. 11 O.A. No. 554/2020 Item No. 15 (C-5)
8. We have no reason to take a divergent view. Therefore, the present O.A. is allowed and the impugned communication dated 21.10.2019 is quashed and set aside. The competent authority amongst the respondents is further directed to accord the same benefit to the applicants in the present O.A., subject to their meeting the other conditions and criteria set forth for grant of MACP, as has been accorded to the applicants in O.A. no. 900/2020 vide order dated 13.04.2021.
9. These directions shall be complied with within a period of 12 weeks' from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
10. The O.A. stands allowed against the background of these directions.
There shall be no orders as to costs.
(Manish Garg) (Tarun Shridhar)
Member (J) Member (A)
/NISHA/