Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
Latha Vaidyanathan vs Dopt on 10 March, 2023
ey I O0.A,1151/2014 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH OA NO.1151/2014 eal Dated day the lo day of March Two Thousand Twenty Three CORUM: HON'BLE MR. T.JACOB, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER & HON'BLE MS. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Latha Veidyanathan Assistant, (A.D.) Office of the Senior Architect, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai-90 Applicant By Advocate M/S. V.Vijay Shankar Vs. I The Union of India Rep. Secretary to Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training New Dethi 2 The Chief Architect CPWD, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai .. Respondents By Advocate Shri. K.Rajendran 2 0.A.1151/2014 ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J)) By this Original Application, the applicant prays for the following relief:-
"Tt is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the applicant four special increments of Rs.400/- each in the revised scale of pay as per the 6" pay commission scales with effect from 1.1.2006 with arrears and all consequential and pass such other order or orders may be deemed fit and thus render justice."
Brief facts of the case in nutshell as under:
The applicant joined in CPWD as Assistant in the year 1988 and the Applicant is a National Level Carrom Player and has represented the CPWD in National Level Tournament. According to the OM dt.16.7.1985 issued by the Government of India, the special increment totalling five have to be awarded to the Government servants for participating in the sports events at national and international levels, The applicant was granted one special increment in January 1994 and the 2" increment in Feb. 1996, 3"
increment was sanctioned in April 1998 and the 4" increment in November,1999. The said increments were granted to the applicant as per the Pay Commission norms. According to the applicant as per the 6" CPC OM dt.18.5.2010 and as per the letter issued by the Ministry of Urban Development dt.3.5.2013, one special increment at 3% p.m. as Personal Pay was granted, The said benefit has been granted to another sports 3 0.A.1151/2014 person to Shri.G.Ramesh working in the same Department. Therefore, the applicant has submitted her representation dt.19.072013 and requested the said benefit though her claim has been processed as she was getting the said increment even after 6" CPC at the rate of Rs.150. Hence, she requested to grant a special increment at Rs.400 from 1.1.2006. Though the applicant has made her request, however, no benefit has been granted to the applicant. Therefore, she has approached this Hon'ble Tribunal in the present O.A. praying for the aforesaid relief.
2 After notice, the Respondents have entered appearance through their Counsels and filed a detailed reply statement. and contended that the applicant has been granted the said special increment according to the circulars and Oms and she has not made out the case that instruction in the OM dated 19.9.2013 applicable to her. The applicant has been granted the Personal Pay according to the prevailing policy, guidelines prior to 6"
CPC for her achievement in sports quota. Shri.Ramesh who is another sports person , increment for his achievement in sports was granted in the year 2010. As per the prevailing guidelines, in terms of 6" CPC, he has been granted 3% increment. In view of this, the respondents prayed that there is no merit in the OA and accordingly to be dismissed.
4 O.A.1151/20143 Heard M/S Vijaya Shankar for applicant and Shri.K.Rajendran for Respondents and perused relevant records of OA and judgement/orders listed by the Counsels.
4 It is to be noted that according to 6" CPC recommendations, the persons from the Sports Quota is eligible and entitled for the said increment of Rs.400. It is also to be noted that OM dt.19.9.2013, the DoPT has decided to prant the said benefit w.e.f.1.9.2013 Further by OM date 3.5,2013, the Personal Pay of the applicant was revised and worked out Rs.560 ie wef.1.1.2006. It is to be noted that respondents themselves has granted the Pe-sonal Pay by way of special increment w.e.f.1.1.2006 which is seen from the letter dt.21.11.2013 issued by the DDO/Architect addressed to the Under Secretary, Min. of Urban Development. From the letter, it is not in dispute that the applicant is entitled for such increment w.e.f.1.1.2006, the query is pertaining to aiTears.
5 In this connection, admittedly, the special increment after 6" CPC has been revised and granted to Shri.Ramesh who is similarly situated with the applicant. In view of this, there cannot be any discrimination by granting the special increment to the applicant. Therefore, stand taken by the respondents in their reply that applicants has been granted incentives as per the prevailing policy guidelines revised from time to time is contrary to the recommendations of the 6" CPC and discriminatory in nature, 5 0,A.1151/2014 6 Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances, according to the recommendations of the 6" CPC, the applicant is also entitled for the said increment at Rs.400 in the revised scale w.e.f.1.12006. Hence in view of this, the OA is allowed, Respondents are directed to grant four special increment of Rs.400 in the revised scale of pay as per the 6" CPC w.e.f.1.1.2006 with all consequential benefits. There is no order to cost.
Tg TR mere ntae en ie a ce el ia. ae pe ae a iar ; fi 4 4 ¥ 4