Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. M.P. Dwivedi vs N.D.M.C on 23 August, 2012
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
TA No.30/2011
Order reserved on 25.07.2012
Order pronounced on 23.08.2012
HONBLE MR. G. GEORGE PARACKEN, MEMBER (J)
HONBLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
1. Sh. M.P. Dwivedi,
F-10, Palika Niketan, R.K. Puram,
Sec.X, New Delhi 22.
2. Sh. D.C. Grover,
KP 192, Pitam Pura,
Delhi 34.
3. Sh. Hoshiar Singh,
Vill & P.O. Kalwari,
Dist. Gurgaon, (Haryana).
4. Sh. Subhash Chander,
163 D, J & K Dilshad Garden,
Delhi 95.
5. Sh. Ajit Singh Mann,
362, Khera Khurd,
Delhi 82.
6. Sh. Ajit Singh,
D-108, B.K. Dutt Colony,
New Delhi 23.
7. Sh. Ashwani Kumar,
1836, Laxmi Bai Nagar,
New Delhi 23.
8. Sh. Pushkar Singh Bist,
346/1 A, Fajal Pur Mandawali,
Delhi 92.
9. Sh. Harinder Singh,
X/2887, Street No.4,
Ragubar Pura No.2,
Gandhi Nagar, Delhi 31.
10. Sh. Satish Chand Notiyal,
B-62, Brij Vihar,
Ghaziabad (UP).
11. Sh. Ashok Kumar Thakur
85, Munirka Village,
New Delhi -17.
12. Sh. Grish Chand Panth,
Falt No. 82/C, Block J
Phase-I, Ashok Vihar,
Delhi 32.
13. Sh. Sarbjit Singh,
3014, Sant Nagar,
Rani Bagh, Delhi 34.
14. Sh. Yogender Aswal,
163-D, Pocket J&K Dilshad Garden,
Delhi 95.
15. Sh. Raj Kumar Tyagi,
Vill & P.O. Joun Chana,
Distt. Bulandshahar (UP).
16. Sh. Surender Singh Panwar,
2420, Ragubar Pura No.2,
Gali No. 9, Gandhi Nagar,
17. Sh. Mahinder Singh,
S/o Sh. Budha Ram,
Vill. & P.O./ Pawla, Tehsil Baghpat,
Distt. Meerut (UP).
Applicants
(By advocate: Sh. P.K. Sharma)
VERSUS
1. N.D.M.C., through,
The Administrator,
N.D.M.C., Palika Center,
New Delhi 110001.
2. The Secretary,
N.D.M.C.,
Palika Center,
New Delhi 110 001.
Respondents
(By Advocate: Sh. Arun Bhardwaj)
O R D E R
Shri G.George Paracken, Member(J) This case was originally filed as WP(C) No. 2630/1996 before the Honble High Court of Delhi and it was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 01.02.2002, on the submission made by the petitioners counsel that the petitioners will approach the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal constituted under the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 for adjudication of their grievance. However, the Industrial Tribunal, vide its order dated 31.08.2010, did not entertain the petition as not maintainable holding that without a reference, it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim. Thereafter, the high Court revived the WP(C) and listed it for final hearing. Meanwhile, the jurisdiction of the respondent-NDMC in service matters was conferred upon this Tribunal and accordingly the High Court, vide its order dated 07.12.2011, transferred this case to this Tribunal and it has been registered as the present Transfer Application.
2. The brief facts of the fact are that the petitioners (hereinafter referred to as Applicants) are the Draftsmen in Electrical Department of the Respondents, New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC for short).
3. There was a Committee known as Sivasankar Committee (Committee for short) which recommended higher pay scale to the employees in the Electrical Department of the then Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU for short). The Council of NDMC, vide its annexure 1 Resolution No.1 dated 07.01.1974 resolved to extend the benefits recommended by the Sivasankar Committee in the matter of pay scales to the employees of DESU, to the employees of NDMC working in their Electrical Department including the category of Draftsman, w.e.f. 01.04.1972. Thereafter, the Draftsmen in the NDMC had represented time and again for grant of the pay scales on the pattern of the pay scales available to Draftsmen working in DESU. However, in implementation of the aforesaid resolution, there were some anomalies with regard to the fixation of pay scale within the various categories of Draftsmen, namely, the Junior Draftsmen, Senior Draftsmen and the Head Draftsmen. Consequently, the officials of the Electric Department in NDMC made representations for removing the anomaly with regard to the pay scales of the Draftsmen in NDMC on the ground that the work done by them is rather more and of higher quality as compared to their counter parts in the DESU. However, the Finance Department of NDMC did not concur with the recommendations of the officials of the Electrical Department and consequently the matter was decided to be closed. But, the Draftsmen of the NDMC sought reconsideration of the matter supplying the entire information regarding the identical nature of the work of Draftsmen in both NDMC as well as the DESU. Thereafter, the Finance department of NDMC has also agreed to the extension of benefits of parity of pay scales to the Draftsmen by revising the pay scale of Junior Draftsmen/Sr. Draftsmen and Head Draftsmen at par with their counter parts in DESU from retrospective dates but without any arrears. Later on, they have agreed to allow the financial benefits from the date of Committees recommendation and on obtaining individual undertaking from the Draftsmen. Similarly, the Law Department of the NDMC has also concurred with the decision to grant parity in the pay scales of Draftsmen of NDMC with those in DESU. However, the said recommendations were not implemented by NDMC. As a result, the Draftsmen had again represented to NDMC for implementation of the decision taken by them and to grant them the pay scale on the pattern of DESU. Yet no decision was taken by the Respondents for extending the benefit of equality to the Draftsmen. On the contrary, the Draftsmen working in the Mechanical (Auto) Department has been extended the benefits of the Committee vide its office order dated 20.09.1996 by virtue of the said order, the existing anomaly in the pay scale of Draftsmen working in the Electrical Department of the NDMC has further widened. Thus, while the Draftsmen in Mechanical (Auto) Department were granted the pay scale of Rs.1640-3275 w.e.f. 01.01.1986, the Sr. Draftsmen in the Electrical Department (the Applicants) continued to draw the pay scale of Rs.1350-2660. The Applicants have, therefore, submitted that the situation has worsened inasmuch as while earlier they were suffering discrimination vis-`-vis their counterparts in DESU only, now they are suffering discrimination even against the Draftsmen working in the Mechanical (Auto) Department of the Respondent itself. They have, therefore sought a direction to the Respondents NDMC to grant them the pay scales to various categories of Draftsmen working with it at par with the corresponding categories of Draftsmen working in DESU w.e.f. the date of the Resolution No.1 dated 07.01.1974.
7. The learned counsel for the Applicants has also relied upon the order of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in TA No.280/2009 with TA 943/2010 decided on 12.07.2010. The Applicant in TA No.280/2009 (WP(C) filed in 2001) before Honble High Court of Delhi had sought revised pay scale as per the recommendations of the Sivasankar Committee with arrears. In TA No. 943/2009, Assistant AC Operators-cum-A.C. Mechanics have filed WP(C) before the Honble High Court of Delhi in 2002 challenging the Respondents order dated 23.10.2000 and have sought implementation of the recommendations of the Sivasankar Committee at par with their counterparts in Delhi Vidyut Board/DESU w.e.f. 01.04.1971 with arrears. This Tribunal, vide order dated 12.07.2010, allowed both the TAs and its operative part reads as under:-
8. We have carefully considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material on record. In our considered view when the Apex Court in Narender Kumar (supra) has clearly ruled parity between the Auto Workshop staff of NDMC with their counterparts in Delhi Vidyut Board/DESU, it does not lie within the jurisdiction of the administrative authority to come to a conclusion different from it, by stating that they are pitted differently in functional requirements. It amounts to infiltrating into an area occupied by judicial dicta, which cannot be countenanced in law.
9. As we find that in an identical situation when in the case of Mr. Beg the respondents have admitted to have erroneously fixed his pay scale under the S.S. Committee at par with counterparts in DVB/DESU and what has been allowed is the revised pay scale, it holds good for all the categories, which were subject matter of the decision of the Apex Court and rather as a model employer the revised pay scales should have been suo motu granted by the respondents to the applicants. However, the same has been withheld leading to unnecessary litigation. In such view of the matter, this erroneous grant of pay scale holds good for the set of employees, i.e., applicants in the TAs and we have no hesitation to hold that the respondents have deprived applicants S.S. Committees pay scales, as revised in case of their counterparts in DVB/DESU. The Apex Court in Union of India v. Satyabarth Choudhry, (2010) 1 SCC (L&S) 475 held that the differential treatment in the matter of pay scale amounts to an illegality.
10. In the above view of the matter, we hold that the applicants are entitled in both the TAs to the revised pay scales, as recommended by the S.S. Committee, and revised in the case of their counterparts in DVB/DESU, with arrears from the date the scales have been allowed to the applicants in the form of only pay scale in pursuance of the decision of the Apex Court in Narender Kumars case (supra). The same shall be disbursed, on implementation, to the applicants, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
4. The Respondents in their reply have submitted that the Sivasankar Committee has recommended higher pay scales in the Electricity Department on the generation side of DESU and it did not recommend any specific pay scales. Therefore, an agreement was reached between the Management and the Workers Union of DESU and decided to revise the pay scales in accordance with the existing pay scales under the 2nd Central Pay Commission (CPC). They have, therefore, submitted that it is incorrect to say that the pay scales of Draftsmen in the NDMC were revised on the lower side. They have also given a comparative position of the pay scales under the Second CPC and the corresponding scales given on the basis of the agreement in DESU as under:-
POST PAY SCALE UNDER PAY SCALE GIVEN ON THE
IIND CPC DESU SCALE PATTERN
a. Jr. Draftsman 110-200 185-300
b. Sr. Draftsman 150-240 250-400
c. Head Draftsman 180-380 300-655
5. Further the Respondents have submitted that the pay scales of several posts in DESU are on the higher side and NDMC is not bound to follow all those pay scales of the former. According to them, the pay scales depend upon the nature of duties and responsibilities of a particular person in a particular organization. Again, they have submitted that the basic principle while adopting the recommendations of Sivasankar Committee in NDMC was to give pay scales at par with the agreement reached between the Management and the workers Union of the DESU. With regard to the Draftsmen in NDMC, the appointing authority has also not agreed to the recommendations of the Special Committee to increase the pay scales because the qualification of the Draftsmen in NDMC and DESU were different and the recommendations of the Finance Department and the law department are merely advisory in nature and it is only the administrator of the NDMC or the Council to take final decision in the matter.
6. As regards the discrimination in the pay scales of Draftsmen in the Auto Work Shop is concerned, they have submitted that there is only one post of Draftsman (Mech.) in the said work shop. He was given the pay scale of Rs.425-700 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in accordance with the recommendations of the 3rd Central Pay Commission and it has been revised to Rs.1400-2300 as per the recommendations of the 4th Central Pay Commission. Later, as per the decision of the Honble Supreme Court of India dated 17.03.1993, the pay of Draftsman in Auto Work Shop was also revised along with other staff of Auto Workshop. Accordingly, the pay scale of Rs.710-1305 w.e.f. 15.02.1985 and in the pay scale of Rs.1640-3275 w.e.f. 01.01.1986 were given to the Draftsmen (Mech.). On the other hand the Electrical Department had three categories of Draftsmen, namely, Junior Draftsmen, Sr. Draftsmen and Head Draftsmen. Their pay scales were originally fixed w.e.f. 01.04.1972 on the recommendations of the 2nd CPC and revised subsequently as under:-
Name of post 14.4.72 under II C.P.C. Pay Scale 1.4.72 Revised in 1.1.78 Sivasankar Committees scale 1.1.86 Jr.Draftsman 110-200 185-300 520-815 1200-2190 Sr.Draftsman 150-240 250-400 60-1000 1350-2660 Head Draftsman 180-380 300-655 710-1305 1640-3275
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the Applicants Sh. P.K. Sharma and the learned counsel for the Respondents Sh. Arun Bhardwaj. The admitted position in this case is that the Supreme authority of the Respondents-NDMC in its council has already decided in its extra ordinary meeting dated 07.01.1974 to extend the benefit of pay and allowances granted to the employees of DESU consequent upon the acceptance of the report of the Sivasankar Committee to Electricity workers working under them. also. Accordingly, the Respondent NDMC revised scales of pay of Electrical workers at par with the similarly placed employees in DESU, w.e.f. 01.04.1972. As far as the post under the category of Draftsmen are concerned, DESU had three grades, namely, Head Draftsmen, Sr. Draftsmen and Junior Draftsmen. As far as Head Draftsman were concerned, their earlier pay scale was Rs.180-10-290-EB-15-380. After accepting the recommendations of the 2nd Central Pay Commissions report, it was revised to Rs.300-20-380-25-505-30-53-ED-30-655 w.ef. 01.04.1972 in NDMC. Similarly, in the case of Sr. Draftsman in the scale of Rs.150-5-175-6-205-ED-240, it was revised to the scale of Rs.250-10-300-ED-20-400 w.e.f. 01.04.1972. The scale of pay of Junior Draftsmen was also revised from Rs.110-200 to Rs.185-300. In NDMC also there were three grades of Draftsman, namely, Junior Draftsman, Senior Draftsman and Head Draftsman and their pay scales were fixed w.e.f. 01.04.1972 corresponding to the pay scale fixed on the basis of the recommendations of the 2nd Pay Commission. Accordingly, the Junior Draftsman, Sr. Draftsman and Head Draftsman were given the pay scale of Rs.110-200, Rs.150-240 and Rs.180-380 respectively. It has been revised to Rs.185-300, Rs.250-400 and Rs.300-655 respectively w.e.f. 01.04.1972. At that time, the scale of pay of Junior Draftsmen, Senior Draftsmen and Head Draftsmen in DESU were Rs.250-400 and Rs.300-475 and Rs.400-750 respectively. Again, the scales of Draftsmen in NDMC were revised to Rs.520-815, Rs.630-1000 and Rs.710-1305 respectively w.e.f. 01.01.1978 on respective scales of pay in DESU. Based on the recommendations of the Sivasankar Committee, they were placed in the scales of Rs.1200-2190, Rs.1350-2660 and Rs.1640-3275 respectively w.e.f. 01.01.1986. However, Draftsmen in DESU were getting the scales of Rs.1350-2660, Rs.1600-3185 and Rs.1800-3500 respectively.
9. In our considered view, such objections raised by the Respondents are absolutely unacceptable particularly in view of the fact that once the Council of NDMC, vide its Resolution dated 07.01.1974 had already resolved to extend the benefits of pay scales to all the categories of its employees at par with the pay scales of the counterparts in DESU and the NDMC itself has implemented in the case of all other categories of Draftsmen working in their own department, namely, Mechanical (Auto) Department, the Respondents can not permitted to take a different view in the case of the Applicants. It has also been seen that the issue of parity in pay scale with the Junior/Senior/Head Draftsmen with their counter parts in DESU has already been examined by the Finance and Law Division of the respondentNDMC and agreed to grant the same but the Respondents did not implement it. In our considered view, once the ultimate Authority of the Respondent-NDMC, namely, the Council has decided to extend the benefit to the Applicants, the same cannot be rejected at a lower level.
10. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, we allow this TA with the direction to the Respondents to grant pay scale to the various categories of the Draftsmen working with them in their Electrical Department at par with the corresponding categories of draftsman working in DESU w.e.f. 01.04.1972 in terms of resolution No.1 dated 07.01.1974 passed by the Council of the Respondent NDMC, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, under intimation to the Applicants with all consequential benefits. The Respondents shall also re-fix the pay of the Applicants from the aforesaid date and accordingly and pay up-to-date arrears within the aforesaid period. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Sudhir Kumar ) ( G. George Paracken )
Member (A) Member (J)
vb