Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Jasbir Singh Bajaj vs The Chief Secretary on 7 July, 2010
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH OA No. 1321/2010 New Delhi this the 7th day of July, 2010 Honble Mr. L.K. Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) Honble Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) Jasbir Singh Bajaj, Working as Resident Commissioner & Officer on Special Duty to Governor, Tamil Nadu House, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi Applicant (Through Shri Mahabir Singh, Senior counsel with Shri Gautam Awasthi, Shri Naresh Beniwal and Shri Rakesh Dahiya, Advocates) VERSUS 1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Public (Special-A) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009. 2. The Secretary to Government of India, Department of Personnel, Pension & Administrative Reforms, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. Respondents (Through Shri A. Mariaputham, Senior counsel with Shri R. Nedumaran, Advocates) O R D E R Mr. L.K. Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) :
The short question to be answered in this case is whether the Applicant would be eligible for grant of Super Time Scale (STS) with effect from 30.09.2003, when the aforesaid grade was given to the officers junior to him in the IAS, when the Applicant has been given Selection Grade with effect from 1.11.2000, the date on which the Selection Grade was granted to his juniors also, retrospectively by order dated 20.04.2009 on the directions of this Tribunal in OA number 1654/2008, Jasbir Singh Bajaj Vs. The Secretary, UPSC and Ors. by order dated 5.12.2008. The following directions were given in the aforesaid OA.
17. In the light of the observations of the Honble Supreme Court, we are of the opinion that the sealed cover proceedings adopted, was an irregular procedure. The applicant ought to have been considered along with his batch mates without any discrimination. Now that the proceedings are lingering for almost twelve years, we can only direct that the sealed cover kept in respect of the applicant for the year 2000 should be opened and if he is found fit for appointment to the selection grade, the benefits are to be extended to him. Likewise, his promotability to a supertime scale also should be reckoned with reference to the sealed covers, which are already there. Appropriately opening them, depending upon the recommendations, such benefits are to be given over to him.
18. We further direct that taking notice of the totality of the circumstances, the applicant will be entitled to a fixation, as if he had been conferred the appointments and promotions from the eligible dates from which such benefits are now to be conferred on him. The monetary benefits to which he is likely to be entitled to because of this exercise are to be paid over to him expeditiously. The OA stands allowed. We make no order as to costs. (emphasis added)
2. The Applicant is a 1987 batch officer of Tamil Nadu Cadre belonging to the IAS. The officers junior to the Applicant in his batch were promoted to the Selection Grade of the IAS with effect from 1.01.2000 and to the STS with effect from 30.09.2003, respectively. The case of the Applicant had been kept in sealed cover, while considering him for Selection Grade because a criminal case had been filed against the Applicant in 1996. However, it is undisputed that charges have not been framed in the criminal case and there is no departmental inquiry pending against him. Taking notice of this fact, a learned Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal gave the aforesaid directions in OA-1654/2008 after taking note of the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. K.V. Jankiraman, (1991) 4 SCC 109. The first Respondent, i.e., the Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu issued an order dated 20.04.2009, wherein the Applicant was promoted to the Selection Grade of IAS with effect from 1.01.2000 and was also allowed to draw arrears of pay and allowances from the same date. Another order was thereafter issued on 5.06.2009, by which the Applicant was promoted to STS of IAS with effect from 20.04.2009. Aggrieved by the order dated 5.06.2009, the Applicant made a representation to the first Respondent seeking implementation of the directions of this Tribunal in full by according him the STS with effect from 30.09.2003, when it was granted to his next junior in his batch. When the first Respondent did not take any cognizance of the representation of the Applicant, the latter moved a Contempt Petition number 515/2009 before this Tribunal. The Contempt Petition was closed with the following observations:
2. Learned counsel for the respondents states, and the applicant, who appears in person also agrees, that the sealed cover has been opened and he has been found fit for appointment to the selection grade and the benefits have been granted to him. It is further stated that the applicant has also been promoted to supertime scale. The applicant is, however, aggrieved that he has not been promoted above his juniors. This would be a separate cause of action for the applicant. The applicant is at liberty to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. That is how the Applicant is before us.
3. The learned senior counsel for the Applicant would contend that the directions for consequential benefits after granting the Applicant Selection Grade in the IAS are contained in paragraphs 17 and 18 of the order of this Tribunal in OA-1654/2008, already adverted to in the foregoing paragraph. The learned counsel would argue that the only reason because of which the Respondents have demurred in giving the Applicant STS is that the Applicant has not worked in the Selection Grade for a period of three years, which is a pre-condition for grant of STS. The learned senior counsel for the Applicant would contend that the above interpretation of the Rules in regard to grant of STS is totally erroneous. Advertence has been made to Rule 3 (2) (iv) of the Indian Administrative Service (Pay) Rules, 2007 (page 92 of the paper book), which is extracted below:
3(2)(iv) A member of the Service shall be entitled to draw pay in the scales of Selection Grade and above only on appointment to these grades. It is urged that the condition of three years service in the Selection Grade before sanctioning the STS is not in the rules. He would further contend that as per directions dated 28.03.2000 issued by the DoP&T, placed at Annex II of the counter affidavit, the members of the Service, working in the Selection Grade, would be eligible for appointment in the STS after completing 16 years of service. It is submitted that a reading of these Rules and instructions would make it clear that there cannot be any impediment in promotion of the Applicant to the STS with effect from 30.09.2003, when the persons immediately junior to him have been promoted to the aforesaid scale of pay. The Applicant has completed 16 years of service before 30.09.2003.
4. The learned counsel for the Respondents would, per contra, draw our attention to Note 1 under Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules, which reads thus:
Note 1 Appointment of a member of the Service to the Time Scale and above shall be regulated as per the provisions in the Guidelines regarding promotion to various grade in the Indian Administrative Service:
Provided that a member of the Service shall become eligible for being appointed to the senior time scale on his completion of four years of service, subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2) of rule 6A of the Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 and to the Junior Administrative Grade on completion of nine years of service, to the Selection Grade on completion of thirteen years of service and to the Super Time Scale on completion of sixteen years of service. Our attention has also been drawn to paragraph (IV) of the instructions dated 28.03.2000, which reads thus:
IV. PROMOTION IN THE SUPERTIME SCALE The members of the Service who are working in the Selection Grade and have completed 16 years of service shall be eligible for appointment in the Supertime Scale at any time during the year of their eligibility, subject to availability of vacancies in this grade. The Screening Committee to consider officers for promotion in this scale would consist of the Chief Secretary as Chairman and 2 officers working in the grade of Principal Secretary within the State Government concerned, as members.
The learned counsel would, when queried, contend that the Respondents, as a matter of grace, granted STS to the Applicant with effect from 20.04.2009, although he had not completed three years of service in the Selection Grade on that date.
5. It seems unfortunate that the first Respondent has quite obviously misinterpreted the Rules and instructions in regard to grant of STS and also has misinterpreted the clear directions given in the order dated 5.12.2008 in OA number 1654/2008. The Applicant has been promoted from 1.01.2000 to the Selection Grade by order dated 20.04.2009. He had been allowed to draw arrears of pay and allowances from that date. It is only because the Selection Grade had wrongfully been denied to the Applicant, by placing the recommendations of the Selection Committee in sealed cover, that the STS had also been denied to the Applicant by order dated 30.09.2003. Just as the Applicant has been given the Selection Grade with effect from 1.01.2000, he should be given the STS also from the date it was given to the Members of the Service immediately junior to him in his batch. The Respondents cannot take advantage of their wrong action in placing the Applicants name in sealed cover for Selection Grade by denying him promotion to the subsequent higher scale later, when the Applicant and his batchmates became eligible for that scale. It is, in our considered opinion, gross injustice to the Applicant. It is not that the Applicant was unwilling to be promoted and take higher responsibilities, but it is the Respondents who have prevented him from doing so. In such circumstances, the Respondents cannot be justified in denying the grant of STS to the Applicant from the date when his immediate junior got the said scale, i.e., 30.09.2003. There is no bar in the Rules and instructions in this regard. The STS has to be given after completion of 16 years of service, which the Applicant completed in 2003. Looked at from another angle, the Applicant should have got the Selection Grade on 1.01.2000, when it was given to his batchmates, junior to him in the batch. When the Selection Grade has been granted to him following the directions of this Tribunal with effect from 1.01.2000, all consequential benefits have to follow, which would include grant of STS.
6. The Rules and instructions in this regard are so clear that it does not seem necessary to us to labour the point any further. We hold that the Applicant would be eligible for promotion to the STS with effect from 30.09.2003 and would be eligible for full payment of pay and allowances in STS from that date onwards. The arrears of pay and allowances would, therefore, be paid to the Applicant by the first Respondent as soon as possible, but not later than 16.08.2010. We are, however, not granting any interest on the arrears. There will be no order as to costs.
( Meera Chhibber ) ( L.K. Joshi ) Member (J) Vice Chairman (A) /dkm/