Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Sadhu Singh S/O Late Sh. Naurata Singh ... vs Advisor To Administrator on 29 November, 2010
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH R.A. No. 73 of 2010 in OA No. 241/CH/2007 Date of order: 29.11.2010 Sadhu Singh s/o Late Sh. Naurata Singh retired XEN (Electrical) Division, presently resident of Houe No. 1345, Sector 34-C, Chandigarh. Applicant Versus 1. Advisor to Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh Circle 47, Chandigarh Deluxe Building, Sector 9, Chandigarh. 2. Secretary Engineering/Finance, Chandigarh Administration, Deluxe Office Building Sector 9, Chandigarh. 3. Chief Engineer, Chandigarh Administration, Circle 47, Chandigarh Deluxe Building, Sector 9, Chandigarh. Respondents O R D E R Honble Sh. Khushiram, Member (A):
This Application has been filed by Shri Sadhu Singh, who was applicant in OA No.241/CH/2007 for review of order dated 4.8.2009 (RA-1), rendered in the said OA.
By our order dated 4.8.2009, it was held that the pay of the applicant in the revised scale should have been fixed at Rs. 14700/- w.e.f.1.1.96 and by grant of one annual increment, it should have been raised to 15100/- w.e.f. 1.4.96. In this view of the matter, the impugned order (Annexure A-1 in the OA), fixing his pay at Rs. 14300/- w.e.f. 1.1.96, was quashed and set aside. Accordingly, a direction was given to the respondents to refix the pay of the applicant on the basis of the above observation and to refund the recover, if any made from him on this account. Applicant is satisfied insofar as this part of the relief is concerned.
However, the applicant, in the RA, has pleaded that the second part of relief regarding withdrawal of annual increments already granted to him, has remained unconsidered by this Tribunal. Elaborating the plea, the applicant has mentioned that during suspension, applicant had been granted annual increments w.e.f. 1998 to 2003 in the unrevised scale, but while fixing the pay of the applicant in the revised scale, these increments were not taken into account and withdrawn without any notice to him. He further pleads that he had also prayed for fixing his pay by taking into account the increments which fell due on 1.1.96 & 1.1.999 and by not counting the increments granted to him by the competent authority while fixing his pay in the revised scale, his pension has been fixed at a lesser rate. In this regard, he had also relied on Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vo.1, Part-1.
Insofar as the annual increment, which was due to the applicant from 1.4.96, is concerned, we have noticed in our order that the by grant of this increment, applicants pay should be fixed at Rs. 15100/-. In the year 1998, he was suspended following registration of FIRs against him and the proceedings in this regard are still pending. Keeping this in mind, it was recorded as under in para 6 of the order:
6. Applicant has also claimed grant of annual increment w.e.f. 1.1.99. Since he was placed under suspension on account of registration of FIRs against him and during suspension a person does not discharge any duties, we cannot direct grant of this increment of the applicant at this stage. However, if he comes out clean from the proceedings against him and is finally exonerated, he can take up the matter with departmental authorities for grant of the same on the g round that he would have continued in service, but was prevented from doing so because of illegal departmental/ court proceedings against him. So, the issue of grant/withdrawal of annual increments has been dealt with in the aforesaid order and there is no mistake apparent on the face of the record. He is to be granted the respective annual increments as per rules and law, only if he is exonerated in the proceedings against him and can take up this issue with the respondents at the relevant time.
Finding no other relevant ground to review the order dated 4.8.2009, the RA is held to be devoid of merit and is rejected by circulation.
(KHUSHIRAM) (SHYAMA DOGRA)
Member (A) Member (J)
4