Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
Shymala H Kumar vs M/O Finance on 6 February, 2025
1 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
OA/310/00598/2015
Dated this the 6th day of February, Two Thousand Twenty Five
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR M. SWAMINATHAN. MEMBER (J)
AND
HON'BLE MR. SANGAM NARAIN SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER(A)
1.Shyamala H. Kumar,
D/o Radhakrishnan
2.Parvathi Ravishankar,
D/o T.S. Ramakrishnan
3.S.S. Jayasree,
D/o Subramanian
4.T.S. Ranganayaki,
D/o T.S. Subramanian
5.P.Padmaja Rani,
D/o T.N. Parthasarathy
6.S. Kala,
D/o P. Subramanian
7.S. Poomadhu,
D/o P. Sadiyan
8.G.N. Jayalakshmi,
W/o G. V. Natarajan
9.Sudha Ganesh,
D/o P.S. Ananthanarayanan
10.Subbulakshmi Parthasarathy,
D/o S. Yegna Subramanian
2 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
11. R. Mythili
D/o K.V. Rangachari
12. C.K. Shyamala Devi,
D/o N. K. Karunakaran
13.Padmaja Rajaraman,
D/o T.V. Srinivasan.
14.Usha Guruprasad,
D/o S.Ramachandran
15.Kalpana Raghavendran,
D/o G. Nagarajan
16.Baby Naaz Sebastian,
D/o J.Sakayaraj
17. Janaki Ramakrishnan,
D/o G.Subramanian
18.Rani Radakrishnan,
D/o N.G. Venkateswaran
19.K.Swarnamala,
D/o S.Chandrasekar
20.Lalitha Subramanian,
D/o P. Narayanaswamy
21.C. Thangammal.
D/o S. Prasanna Venkateswaran
22.Ramamani Ramagopal,
D/o M.S. Dehvanadhan
23.Parvathi Subramanian,
D/o K.S. Lakshmanan
24.K. Meenakumari,
D/o M. Krishnan
25.U.G. Lakashmi,
D/o late U.Govinda Rao
3 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
26.S. Umadevi,
D/o late V. Srinivasan
27.N. Jeeva,
D/o R. Narayanasamy
28.P.B. Sudha,
D/o P.B. Ramanna
29.S. Meenakshi,
D/o N.Srinvasan
30. V. Karpagam,
D/o R. Natarajan
31.Lakshmi Chandrasekaran,
D/o late V. Ramani
32.A.N. Devakumar,
S/o A. Nithyanandam
33.Nalinikumari Srinivasamoorthy,
D/o late Veerabathiran
34.Malika Moien Kaleem,
D/o Ghouse Mohideen
35.P. Vedhavathi,
D/o Lakshminarayana Pattam
36.S. Ganesan,
S/o B.E. Swaminathan
37.R. Jamuna,
D/o P.D. Ramalingam
--- All are working as Senior Accountants
O/o Principal Accountant General (A&E),
Tamil Nadu,Chennai. .. Applicants
By Advocate M/s S. Sadasharam
Vs.
4 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
1. Union of India
rep by The Comptroller and
Auditor General of India,
10, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi.
2. Principal Accountant General(A & E),
Tamil Nadu,Chennai.
3.P. Prasad Rao
4.K. Seetha
- 3 & 4 are working as Senior Accountants
- O/o Principal Accountant General (A&E),
Tamil Nadu,Chennai. .. Respondents
By Advocate Mr. V. Vijay Shankar
5 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member) The applicants in the OA prayed for the following relief:
" to set aside the impugned order dated 16.02.2015 passed in Pr.AG (A&E)/Estt.I/G.III/MACPs 2014- 15/492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 513, 514, 515, 516,517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 523, 524, 525, 527m 528, 529 on the file of the 2 nd respondents and direct the respondents to sanction the Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- to the applicants on par with their juniors in the 2nd respondent establishment from the date on which the grade pay of Rs.5400/- was sanctioned and granted to the juniors following the orders passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in OA Nos.966 and 967 of 2009 dated 29.12.2010 and confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Madras passed in W.P. Nos.18611 & 18612/2011 by order dated 19.03.2014 and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice."
2. The facts leading to the filing of the OA are as follows:
The juniors of the applicants employed in the office of the 2nd respondent approached this Tribunal by filing OA Nos. 966 and 967 of 2009, seeking a direction to grant them the grade pay of Rs. 5400/- on par with their juniors, claiming pay protection under FR 22. This Tribunal allowed the application by order, dated 29.12.2010, which was later confirmed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in its judgment dated 19.03.2014 in WP Nos. 18611 & 18612 of 2011. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also confirmed the order by its ruling on 19.08.2014. Subsequently, the present applicants 6 OA No.310/00598 of 2015 filed OA No. 1644 of 2014, seeking the sanction of grade pay of Rs. 5400/- on par with their juniors in the 2nd respondent's establishment. This application was allowed by the Tribunal on 30.10.2014, directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation on merits in accordance with the law. However, the 2nd respondent, by the impugned order dated 16.02.2015, arbitrarily rejected the applicants' claim, based on an erroneous appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case. This decision was in direct contradiction to the order passed by the Tribunal in identical cases, which had been confirmed by both the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the present OA has been filed.
3. When the matter was heard, the learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have filed the present OA seeking pay parity with their juniors, who were granted a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- under the MACP Scheme. The counsel referred to the Tribunal's orders in OA No. 966 & 967 of 2009, dated 29.12.2010, which granted similar relief to senior officers on par with their juniors. This order was upheld by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in WP Nos. 18611 & 18612 of 2011, dated 19.03.2014, and later confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 11103/2014, although the question of law was left open. The counsel therefore sought similar relief in the present OA. 7 OA No.310/00598 of 2015
4. When the same was put forth to the learned counsel for the respondents, they relied on their respective reply statements asserting that similar issues are pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the said circumstance, they requested that an appropriate order be passed by this Tribunal in this regard.
5. We have carefully considered the arguments of both parties, reviewed the pleadings and the materials on record, and examined the relevant judgments referred to by them.
6. The central issue in the present OA is whether the applicants are entitled to have their grade pay stepped up to Rs. 5400/-, in line with their juniors/subordinates who were granted this higher grade pay under the MACP Scheme.
7. We note that similar OAs have been allowed by this Tribunal, and the orders have been upheld by the respective jurisdictional High Courts. However, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India has appealed these decisions before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a batch of SLPs (SLP Nos. 14918/2016 & others), which are still pending consideration.
8. In light of the fact that the question of law is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in these appeals concerning similarly situated 8 OA No.310/00598 of 2015 individuals, we direct the respondents to consider the applicants' claims based on the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision, within a time- bound manner.
9. With the above directions, the OA is disposed of. No order as to costs.
(SANGAM NARAIN SRIVASTAVA) (M. SWAMINATHAN)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
06.02.2025
mas