Kerala High Court
Union Of India vs G.Swaminathan on 18 November, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KER 1025
Bench: A.M.Shaffique, P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1942
OP (CAT).No.128 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA 788/2017 DATED 11-10-2018 OF CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES,RIVER DEVELOPMENT AND
GANGA REJUVENATION,SHRAM SAKTHI BHAVAN,RAFI MARG,NEW
DELHI-110001.
2 CHAIRMAN,
CENTRAL GROUND WATER, BHUJAL BHAVAN, NHIV, FARIDABAD-
121 001.
BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENT/APPLICANT:
G.SWAMINATHAN
(RETIRED SENIOR HYDROLOGIST),CENTRAL GROUND WATER
BOARD,PRASEEDA,
95A,ULLOOR GARDENS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695011.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN
R1 BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SMITHA
R1 BY ADV. SMT.T.T.SHANIBA
R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.V.VIPINDAS
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-11-2020, THE COURT
ON 18-11-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 18th day of November, 2020. Gopinath, J The Union of India and its officers have filed this original petition challenging the order dated 11.10.2018 in OA No. 788 of 2017 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench.
2. The respondent (applicant before the Tribunal) had approached the Tribunal praying inter alia for a direction to the petitioners herein (respondents before the Tribunal) to extend to him the benefits of a scheme known as the 'Flexible Complementing Scheme' (FCS) with effect from 6.6.1987 and grant in situ promotions in accordance with the said scheme with effect from the date on which they were due and to accordingly calculate and disburse the benefits payable. The respondent had earlier approached the Tribunal seeking an extension of the FCS scheme to hydrologists in the Central Groundwater Board. It was his case that hydrologists were excluded from the benefit of the scheme on account of the fact that the post of hydrologist was wrongly categorized as a Group-B Post. Through an order dated O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 3 14.8.1997 in OA 886/97, the Tribunal allowed this claim and found that the FCS scheme had to be extended to hydrologists also. This order of the Tribunal was upheld by this Court in OP No. 22691 of 1997. The order of the Tribunal as affirmed by this Court was implemented. The respondent again approached the Tribunal by filing OA No. 788 of 1997. According to the respondent he was entitled to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'C' with effect from 1.1.1991 whereas the benefit was extended to him only with effect from 1.1.1992 and to promotion placement as Scientist Grade-'D' with effect from 1.1.1995 whereas the said benefit was never granted to him. The 1st respondent retired from service on 31.1.2004.
3. The petitioners had filed a reply statement before the Tribunal where after setting out the background facts, it was stated as follows: -
"The applicant joined as Junior Hydrogeologist (Group 'B' Gazetted) w.e.f 21.11.1983, later on re-designated as Assistant Hydrologist (Group 'B' Gazetted) and is eligible for his in-situ promotion to the grade of Scientist 'C' under FCS w.e.f 01.01.1992 on completion of 08 years residency period in the feeder grade as per provision of the existing recruitment rules and further in-situ promotion to the grade of Scientist 'D' under O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 4 FCS w.e.f 01.01.1997 on completion of 05 years residency period."
A reading of the aforesaid shows that even according to the petitioners, the respondent was entitled to the benefit of FCS by placement as scientist 'C' with effect from 1.1.1992, on completion of 8 years of residency in the feeder grade and further placement as Scientist Grade-'D' with effect from 1.1.1997 on the completion of a period of 5 years as Scientist Grade-'C'. The Tribunal has noticed the submissions and has only directed the grant of benefits as contemplated by the scheme.
4. The learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the petitioners would contend that if the order of the Tribunal is implemented, unintended and undeserved benefits would accrue to the respondent and that placement in the higher grade under the FCS was not automatic and that it was to be granted only after evaluation of scientific work in the manner contemplated by the scheme.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that while the respondent had claimed that he was entitled to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'C' with effect from 1.1.1991 and O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 5 to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'D' with effect from 1.1.1995, he would be satisfied if the petitioners would extend the benefit from 1.1.1992 (as Scientist-C) and from 1.1.1997 (as Scientist-D) as was admitted in the reply statement which we have extracted hereinbefore.
6. We have considered the contentions raised. There is possibly merit in the contention raised by the learned Assistant Solicitor General that placement in the higher grade under the FCS was not automatic and that it was to be granted only after evaluation of scientific work in the manner contemplated by the scheme. In that view of the matter, there could not have been automatic up-gradation after completion of the prescribed period of residency in a particular grade. However, we are not called upon to examine that issue since it is the specific case of the petitioners before the Tribunal that the respondent was entitled to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'C' with effect from 1.1.1991 and to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'D' with effect from 1.1.1995.
7. In the light of the above without going into the merits, we dispose of this original petition holding that the respondent was entitled to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'C' with effect from 1.1.1991 O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 6 and to promotion/placement as Scientist Grade-'D' with effect from 1.1.1995 and direct the petitioners herein to recalculate and disburse any arrears of pay/pension/pensionary benefits on that basis. Any amount of arrears found payable on such recalculation shall be disbursed within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. No costs.
sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE sd/-
GOPINATH P., JUDGE acd O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.A.NO.788 OF 2017 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 22.09.2017.
EXHIBIT P1(A6) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.05.2017 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P1(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE CONTAINING THE VARIOUS GROUP, GRADE AND CATEGORY OF POSTS WITH THE METHOD OF PROMOTION DATED NIL EXHIBIT P1(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.08-97 IN OA NO.886 OF 1006 OF THE CAT,ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P1(A3) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DATED 28.05.1986.
EXHIBIT P1(A4) TREU COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.1.2015 IN OP NO.22691 OF 1997.
EXHIBIT P1(A5) TRUE COPY OF HTHE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 21.12.2016 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
EXHIBIT P1(A7) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17- 07-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DATED 07-06-2018 EXHIBIT P2(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE OM DATED 28-05-1986 OF GOVT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT P2(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED RULE DATED 03.02.1998 OF THE MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES,NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT P2(A3) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ORDER DATED 14.08.1997 IN OA NO.886 OF 1996 OF THIS TRIBUNAL EXHIBIT P2(A4) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED O.P.(CAT)No.128/2019 8 23.01.2015 IN OP 22-06-1997 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P2(A5) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.22/34/1996- CGWB DATED 07.04.2017 OF THE MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT P2(A6) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.3-(GS MENON)/2015-SCI.ESST.DATED 15.05.2017 OF THE MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPARATIVE TABLE SHOWING BENEFITS DUE TO THE APPLICANT UNDER THE ORDER DATED 14.08.1997 IN OA NO.886 OF 1996 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.10.2018 IN OA NO.788 OF 2017 IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT-R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM OF THE MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING DATED 09/11/1998