Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
Sri Jayakumar C.K vs Indian Council Of Agricultural ... on 15 January, 2016
Author: P.Gopinath
Bench: P.Gopinath
Central Administrative Tribunal
Ernakulam Bench
OA 1216/2012
Friday, this the 15th day of January, 2016
CORAM
Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.K.Balakrishnan, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mrs. P.Gopinath, Administrative Member
1. Sri Jayakumar C.K.
Programme Assistant (Computer) (T3)
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Peruvannamuzhi
Indian Institute of Spices Research
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
(P.O.) Marikunnu, Calicut-673 012.
2. Sri Kannan S.
Farm Manager (T-3)
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Peruvannamuzhi
Indian Institute of Spices Research
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
(P.O.) Marikunnu, Calicut-673 012. . . . . Applicants
(By Advocte: Mr.P.K.Madhusoodhanan)
Versus
1. Indian Council of Agricultural Research
represented by its Secretary
Indian Council of Agricultural Research
Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi-110 001.
2. The Director
Indian Institute of Spices Research
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
(P.O.) Marikunnu, Kozhikode-673 012.
3. The Administrative Officer
Indian Institute of Spices Research
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
(P.O.) Marikunnu, Kozhikode-673 012.
4. Union of India through the Secretary
Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan
New Delhi-110 001. . . . . . . Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr.P.Santhosh Kumar (R1-3)
The Original Application having been heard on 26th November, 2015,
this Tribunal delivered the following order on 15th January 2016 :-
ORDER
By P.Gopinath, Administrative Member The applicants are Programme Assistant (Computer) and Farm Manager respectively working in the Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Indian Institute of Spices Research, Calicut. Their grievance is that while others similarly situated are drawing pay in pre-revised scale of Rs.5500-9000 (Revised Scale Rs.9300- 34800 with GP 4200/-) with grade number T-4, they alone are discriminated against and are paid lower scale of pay, Grade Pay and given lower grade number. It is stated that Annexure A4 to A6 would show that the post of Programme Assistant (Computer) and Farm Manager in each KVK are in the T-4 grade in scale Rs.5500-9000, corresponding scale being 9300-34800 with GP Rs.4200 (PB2). The applicant has filed this OA praying for the following reliefs:-
(i) Declare tht the applicants are eligible and entitlted to draw pay in scale Rs.5500-9000 and in its corresponding pay of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay Rs.4200 with grade number T-4 as granted to in Annexures A4 to A6 and A13 and to similarly situated employees in Krishi Vigyan Kendra under the respondents treating similarly situated alike, untrammeled by Annexure A15 and A16.
(ii) Issue necessary directions to the respondents to grant and disburse to the applicants pay in scale Rs.5500-9000 and in corresponding pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4200 and grade number T-4 in pursuance of XI plan accepted and approved by the Council and disburse the difference in arrears of pay with reasonable interest from their dates of appointments within a time limit.
(iii) Set aside Annexure A15 and A16.
2. The respondents resist the OA contending that the applicants were appointed to the T-3 grade of Technical category II as per ICAR Technical Service Rules on a pay scale of Rs.5200-20200 with Rs.2800 as grade pay (revised pay scale as per 6 th CPC) based on written test followed by personal interview by a selection committee. The applicants filed the OA for upgrading their designation and placing them at higher pay scales. It is contended that initially Annexure A1 advetisement was published. Subsequently, based on a clarification received from 1st respondent, the advetisement was modified as per Annexure R2 (a). In the modified advertisement, the designation and pay scales for the post of Programme Assistant and Farm Manager were shown as T-3 Rs.5200-20200 with Rs.2800 as GP. In the appointment order also (Annexure R2(b), the designations and pay scales are clearly indicated as T-3 with above pay scale. The applicants accepted the terms and conditions and joined the post. The standard of written test differs for posts at different levels of technical grades. Normally the test and interview for the post of T-4 would be more tough than that of T-3. Annexures A4 & A5 do not make the applicants eligible for automtic placement at grade T4. Annexures A4 & A5 can only be considered as a general circular regrding the staff position in a KVK with the replacement pay scales for each post. They are silent on the promotional posts available in a KVK. As per the Technical Service Rules of the 1st respondent under which the applicants were appointed, T-4 is a promotional post and an official is eligible for merit promotion to the post only after completion of a prescribed period of 5 years in T-3. Therefore, the applicants are not entitlted to the reliefs sought for, contend the respondents.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the respondents and perused the written submission made.
4. Respondents aver that initially Annexure A1 advertisement was uploaded on its website. On receipt of clarification from 1 st respondent, the advertisement ws modified to T3 with pay scale Rs.5200-20,200/- with GP Rs. 2800/- and the modification was published in Indian Express daily on 6/7/2009. The applicants' appointment letter also shows the pay scale as T3 in Rs.5200-20,200/- with Rs.2800 as Grade Pay. Hence the terms of engagement were stipulated vide the printed publication.
5. The applicants were selected following the recruitment procedure for Technical Grade T3 post which includes a written test followed by an interview of candidtes who qualify the writteen test. The standard of written test varies for posts at different level of Technical Grade. Applicants were tested, evaluated and graded on the basis of a written test of T3 standard. The test and interview for T4 grade would be different and tougher than T3 grade. Annexure A4 and A5 are general circulars. Annexure A4 is a general circular showing the composition of KVK under the XI Plan Scheme and also indicates that farmers attending training programme will be provided meals, rail/bus fares etc. Annexure A4 nowhere mentions that those recruited in a lower scale will be automatically upgraded to the higher scale.
6. Annexure A5 document dated 29/3/2011 indicates the revised pay scale of staff of KVK on the recommendation of VI CPC. However, the advertisement Annexure A1 does say under 'General instructions for candidates' under item 4 that application form separate for (T3 & T6) can be downloaded from the website. There is no mention of a T4 application form. The appointment order Annexure A2 also indicates pay scale as Rs.5200- 20,200/-. Hence it appears that a conscious decision was taken to fill the post as T3. The applicants have also been evaluated for T3 post. The applicants were already informed that they would be accepting the post on terms and conditions given in the appointment letter. The appointment letter was for T3 post. Hence applicants walked into their appointment with eyes open and fully aware of their terms of engagement an it was not as if their terms were changed after their engagement. They were clearly engaged as per terms and conditions already informed to them vide advertisement, with subsequent correspondence and appointment letter. Appointment on conditions other than notified would vitiate the recruitment process. It would be a denial of chance to those who would have applied had they known it was a T4 and not a T3 post. The applicants do not have the right to seek appointment for a post other than that which was advertised (with corrigendum) and for which selection was made. The promotion from T3 to T4 is given after a certain number of years of service after experience in T3 post. The respondents also bring out that the agricultural scenario in every district of the country varies and the work of KVK staff also would vary accordingly. No two KVKs are similar. The size of instructional farm, the crops grown, its maintenance and responsibility would vary. Therefore, uniformity does not exist among the KVKs. Hence a conscious decision was taken with due notification and public announcement.
7. The applicants point out that in a similar recruitment of Programme Assistant and Lab Technician in CMFRI, the selected candidates were offered T4 grade. Hence the applicants' claim for parity though recruited for a lower post with similar staff of other KVK acquires some justification. It is not a case where T3 post was upgraded/merged to T4 by 6 th CPC.
8. If similarly placed staff with similar responsibility recruited about the same time in other IARI institutes like CMFRI were placed in T4 as contended by the applicant then it is necessary to give the applicant a chance to produce such a case so that respondents can treat him similarly. The respondent institute will within a period of one month verify if such similarly placed staff with similar responsibility, recruited about the same time in any other IARI institutes like CMFRI were placed in T4 though the post was advertised as T3. If so, the applicants be also placed in T4 with effect from the date of filing of this OA with all monetary benefits and arrears accruing therefrom. The entire exercise will be completed in three months. OA is disposed of accordingly.
(P.Gopinath) (N.K.Balakrishnan) Administrative Member Judicial Member aa.