Karnataka High Court
Union Of India vs Lakshminarayana on 19 June, 2012
Bench: N.Kumar, H.S.Kempanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF JUNE, 2012
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S.KEMPANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.8792/2012 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN:
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HEALTH
AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES
NIRMAN BHAVAN
NEW - DELHI - 110 011.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
HEALTH SERVICES
NIRMAN BHAVAN
NEW DELHI - 110 - 011.
3. THE DIRECTOR
NATIONAL TUBERCULOSIS INSTITUTE
NO.8, BELLARY ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 003. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.Y. HARIPRASAD, ADV,)
AND:
LAKSHMINARAYANA
S/O. BALAPPA
2
AGED 50 YEARS
FIELD INVESTIGATOR
NATIONAL TUBERCULOSIS INSTITUTE
NO.8, BELLARY ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 003. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.M.R.S.RAO, C/R.1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN O.A.NO.279/2010
ON 19.10.11 PASSED BY THE CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH AT
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, N. KUMAR J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioners have challenged in this writ petition the order dated 11th October, 2011 passed by the Tribunal holding that the applicant/respondent in this writ petition is entitled to Patient Care Allowance from 5.12.2000 onwards and the arrears shall be paid within ninety days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the application. 3
3. The applicant is working as Filed Investigator in Group-C (Non Ministerial) cadre in the National Tuberculosis Institute, Bangalore, which is functioning under the Directorate General of Health Services and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. The Government of India by letter dated 25.01.1988 granted Patient Care Allowance to Groups C and D (Non-Ministerial) employees, including all drivers of Ambulance Cars, but excluding Staff Nurses. The said benefit was extended by the Government of India to Groups C and D (Non- Ministerial) employees working in NMEP, HICD, RAK College of Nursing, LRHS, RHTC-Najafgarh, Port/Airport Health Organization at the rate of Rs.690/- per month w.e.f. 29.12.1998. As the petitioner/applicant was a Group C employee, he was entitled to the said benefit. By an office order dated 6.12.2000 he was promoted as Investigator purely on ad hoc basis for a period of six months in a pay scale of Rs.5,500 - 9,000/- w.e.f. 4 05.12.2000. The said ad hoc promotion granted to the applicant to the post of Investigator was extended for a further period of one year w.e.f. 5.6.2001. There is no further extension. But, he is continued as Investigator on ad hoc basis. By an order dated 22.01.2001 the first Financial Upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.5,500 - 9,000/- under the ACP Scheme was granted to the applicant w.e.f. 15.11.2000. After the said ad hoc promotion, the said Patient Care Allowance was stopped to the petitioner. Therefore, he made a representation for payment of the said allowance, not once but twice. But ultimately, the same was rejected. It is thereafter, he preferred an application before the Tribunal.
4. The Tribunal on consideration of the rival contentions held that the applicant was initially promoted as Investigator for a period of six months. Subsequently, it was extended by one year and as there was no further extension he ceased to be an Investigator and therefore, he is entitled to the aforesaid allowance. 5 Secondly, it relied on Annexure -A.7 dated 4.2.2004 where a reference is made to the memorandum dated 10.2.2000, where it was clarified that Group C employees who have been granted the pay scale of Group B post under the ACP Scheme would continue to be entitled to the payment of Hospital Patient Care Allowance/Patient Care Allowance. Further it was clarified that the classification of the posts held by the officer should be with reference to the scale of pay of the post held by the Government servant on regular basis and not with reference to the higher pay scale granted to the Government servant under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme and therefore, it held that as the applicant is not holding the post of Investigator on regular basis, he cannot be denied the benefit of the said allowance. Aggrieved by the said order, the Union of India is before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the Union of India assailing the impugned order contended that the 6 observation of the tribunal that after expiry of one year period where extension was granted to the applicant in the post of Investigator, as there is no further extension he ceased to be an Investigator is contrary to the material. Even to this day, the applicant is working as Investigator i.e, Group B post and therefore, he is not entitled to the said allowance. It is an admitted fact that even to this day, the petitioner is not holding the post of Investigator Group B on regular basis. He was promoted to the said post on 05.12.2000 on ad hoc basis. The pay scale of the said post is Rs.5,500 - 9,000/-. But on 22.1.2001 he was granted Financial Upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.5,500/- to Rs.9,000/- under the ACP Scheme with retrospective effect from 15.11.2000. Therefore, the pay scale of Rs.5,500/- to Rs.9,000/- which is paid to him even in pursuance of ad hoc promotion is strictly in terms of the ACP scheme with effect from 15.11.2000. Therefore, the applicant is in no way benefited. This ad hoc promotion did not give any financial benefit. Even after 7 a decade he is not made permanent in the said post. He continues to work on ad hoc basis . The Government memorandum dated 10.02.2000 clarifies that the classification of the post held by the officer should be with reference to the scale of pay of the post held by the government servant on regular basis and not with reference to the higher pay scale granted to the Government servant under Assured Carrier Progression (ACP) scheme. In view of the Department of Personnel and Training's clarification, the Group C employees who have been granted the pay scale of Group B under the ACP Scheme would continue to be entitled to the payment of Hospital Patient Care Allowance/Patient Care Allowance. Therefore, it follows when the applicant is paid the pay scale of Group B employees under the ACP Scheme with effect from 15.11.2000, he is entitled to payment of Hospital Patient Care Allowance/Patient Care Allowance in terms of the aforesaid memorandum that has been extended by the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the said order passed by the 8 Tribunal, which is in accordance with the said circular and also just. No merits. Hence, petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE SA