Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Dhani Ram vs Employees State Insurance Corporation on 12 January, 2023
1
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 1330/2019
This the 12th day Day of January, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1. Dhani Ram
S/o Late Sh. Suraj mani
Aged about : 50 years,
Post: Technician (Group - C)
R/o H.No. 2145, Gali No. 60 -C
New Delhi - 110044
2. Vinod Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Lahana Singh
Aged about : 52 years,
Post : OT Technician (Group - C)
R/o F-II-231, Madangir
New Delhi - 110062.
3. Harender Mahto
S/o Sh. Parmeshwar Mahto,
Aged about : 50 years,
Post: CSR Technician (Group -C)
R/o D-226, Ragubir Nagar,
PO Rajauri Garden
New Delhi - 110027.
4. Birender Kumar
S/o Shri Rago Prasad
Aged about : 50 years,
Post : CSR Assistant (Group -C)
R/o B-3, Type-1, ESI Colony,
Okhla, New Delhi - 110020
5. Satbir Sharma
S/o Late Sh. Yadram Sharma,
Aged about : 47 years
Post : CSR Assistant (Group - C)
R/o RZ P -98, Roshanpura Extn.
Najafgarh, ESI Hospital, Okhla,
Phase - 1, New Delhi - 110020
6. Ajit Kumar
S/o Sh. Om Prakash
Aged about : 48 years
Post : CSSD Assistant (Group - C)
2
R/o B-16, Type-II, ESI Hospital Colony,
Okhla, Phase -1, New Delhi - 110020
7. Amit Kumar,
S/o Sh. Rohtash Kumar
Aged about : 38 years
Post : OT Assistant (Group - C)
R/o H-16/77, Near UCO Bank,
Raitya Marg, Sangam Vihar,
New Delhi - 110080
8. Subhash Chander Purohit
S/o Sh. Chakardhar
Aged about : 51 years
Post : OT Assistant (Group - C)
R/o Q.No. A -13, Type - II
ESI Hospital Staff Colony,
Okhla Phase - 1,
New Delhi - 110020
9. Raj Kumar
S/o Lt. Sh. Chatter Singh
Aged about : 47 years
Post : CSR Assistant (Group - C)
R/o Village & Post Office - Machhgar,
Ballabgarh, Faridabad,
Haryana ...Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. Soumayajit Pani with Ms.
Aishwarya Bajpai )
Versus
1. Employee State Insurance Corporation
Through Director General,
Panchdeep Bhawan,
CIG Road, New Delhi.
2. Medical Superintendent,
ESIC Hospital, Basai Darapur,
New Delhi - 110015.
3. Medical Superintendent
ESIC Hospital
Okhla Phase - I,
New Delhi - 110020 ... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. V.K Singh with Ms. Prachi
Singh, Mr. Yakshi Rawal & Mr. Sourabh Kumar )
3
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) The applicants by virtue of the present OA seek the following reliefs :-
"i. Quash and set-aside the order dated 08.06.2017 (vide annexure A-I) and inter alia direct the respondents to revise the pay scale of the applicants and fix in the pay scale of Rs. 4,000-100-6,000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in terms of the order dated 19.12.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A. No. 2995/2014 and OA No. 2996/2014 (Dharambir Singh Rana & others Versus Director General ESI Corporation & Others) in the interest of justice; and ii. further direct the respondents to revise the payscale of the applicant at Rs. 2,400/- in Payband-I in consonance with the recommendation of 6th Pay Commission in the interest of justice; and iii. grant arrears to the applicants accordingly at least three years prior to the institution to the present application in the interest of justice; and iv. pass any other order/orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the facts of the present case and the status and circumstances of the applicants as also the relief sought are strikingly similar to OA No. 4644/2015 decided on 04.08.2022 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal. While not disputing that issue is identical, 4 learned counsel for the respondents submits that each OA is to be decided on the basis of its own merits. He further submits that the fact that the respondents have agitated this issue in a Writ Petition cannot be ignored.
3. We have gone through the order passed in similar OA and compared it with the pleadings of the instant OA. We are in agreement with the statement made by the learned counsel for the applicants that there are striking similarities in the aforementioned OA. Therefore, there is absolutely no cause before us to take a different view, rather it would be inappropriate. Therefore the present O.A. is allowed on the similar terms. For the sake of clarity the operative part of the order passed in OA No. 4644/2015 is reproduced below:-
"8. In view of the aforesaid, the present OA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to grant the pay scale of Rs. 4000-100-6000 to the present applicants, in accordance with the order/judgment dated 19.04.2016 of this Tribunal in OA No. 2995/2014 with connected OA titled Dharambir Singh Ranga vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation & Ors. However, as directed in the judgment in OA No. 2996/2014, the applicants shall be entitled to arrears only with effect from the date of filing of this OA, without any interest thereon. It is clarified that as recorded, this OA, was filed on 17.12.2016. They shall also not be entitled to payment of any interest upon the arrears so calculated. The respondents are directed to comply with the directions within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We add that this order shall be 5 subject to the outcome of Writ Petition filed by the respondents challenging the earlier orders of this Tribunal on this issue."
4. Accordingly, the O.A. stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(Manish Garg) (Tarun Shridhar)
Member (J) Member (A)
/sb/