Karnataka High Court
The Union Of India vs T. Danappa S/O T. Veerabasappa on 20 August, 2018
Bench: Raghvendra S. Chauhan, B.M.Shyam Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION No.101549/2018 (S-CAT)
& WRIT PETITION Nos.104467-496/2018
BETWEEN:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN,
RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAVAN,
RAISINA ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110001.
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
OLD GM OFFICE BUILDING,
CLUB ROAD, KESHWAPUR,
HUBBALLI-580023.
3. THE FINANCIAL ADVISER AND
CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
OLD GM OFFICE BUILDING,
CLUB ROAD, KESHWAPUR,
HUBBALLI-580023.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. AJAY U PATIL, ADV.)
2
AND:
1. T. DANAPPA S/O T. VEERABASAPPA
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 28.08.1996,
O/O.THE FA & CAO/CN/O/BNC
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1995 BATCH), RETIRED,
AGE:61 YEARS, R/AT NO.560, ANUGRAHA
VISVESVARAYA LAYOUT DIVISION 2,
NEAR SANTHE BEEDH,
HESARAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
CHIKKABNAVARA, BANGALORE-90.
2. JAYANTHI MURTHY D/O. LATE V.SUBRAMANIAM
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 18.09.1992,
O/O.THE FA & CAO/CN/O/BNC
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1989 BATCH), RETIRED,
AGE:61 YEARS,R/AT K1, KAILASH APT.
8TH MAIN,11TH CROSS,
MALLESWARAM-560 003.
3. NAGAMANI SURATH D/O. S.BHASKAR RAO,
WORKING AS SR.SO(A)/TA/SBC FROM 20.10.2003
O/O.SR.AFA/T/SBC,
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1993 BATCH), RETIRED,
AGE:62 YEARS,R/AT D.NO.31, 3RD BLOCK,
BEHIND VENUGOPALASWAMY TEMPLE,
DODDA BOMMASANDRA, VIDYARANYAPURA POST,
BANGALORE-560 097.
4. P.SATAYANARAYAN
S/O. LATE P.NARAYANA MURTHY,
WORKIED AS SR.SO(A) FROM 30.06.1997 IN
O/O.THE FA & CAO/CN/O/BNC
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1992 BACTH), RETIRED,
AGE:65 YEARS,R/AT D.NO.21-3-12,
OPP:SRMT MAIN ROAD, KAKINADA
3
AP STATE, PIN-533 001
5. M.J.S. ABRAHAM S/O. T.T.ABRAHAM
WOR KING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 30.10.2003
O/O.THE SR.DFM/SBC.
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1994 BACTH), RETIRED,
AGE:60 YEARS, R/AT NO.26, BHAUANI NAGAR,
RAILWAY LAYOUT, I CROSS,
I MAIN, ULLAL MAIN ROAD, MALLATHALI,
BANGALORE-560 056
6. ELIZABETH GEORGE D/O.P.V.CHERIAN
WORKING AS SO(A) FROM 20.10.1987
IN THE O/S.SR.AFA/T/SBC,
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1985 BACTH), RETIRED,
AGE:54 YEARS, R/AT NO.17,
NEAR SUNRISE SCHOOL, HEBBAL KEMPAPURA
BANGALORE-560024
7. LIY VIJAY, W/O. VIJAYA KUMAR,
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FORM 04.01.1991,
O/O. OF THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTER RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1988 BACTH), RETIRED,
AGE:60 YEARS, R/AT 115, 1ST CROSS,
18TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE-95.
8. V KRISHNA KUMAR S/O. K.VASU.
WORKING AS ,SR.SO(A) FROM 27.11.1997,
C/O. THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1992 BACTH), RETIRED,
AGE: 60 YEARS, R/AT 46-A,
RAILWAY QUARTEERS, BENSOR TOWN (POST),
BANGALORE CONTONMENT.
9. A.J.JOAM S/O A.C.JOSEPH
4
WORKING AS SR.SO(A)
FROM 21.10.2003,
O/O.THE SR.AFA/T/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1994 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 138, 2ND MAIN,
A.GS COLONY,
BANGALORE 560024.
10. LAIJU C.MATHEW S/O C.E.MATHEW
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 31.05.2002,
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1999 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT 181/D, NEW RAILWAY COLONY
OPP TO MEI, YESHWANTHPUR,
BANGALORE 22.
11. USHA MURTHY D/O K.S.MURTHY,
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 31.10.2003,
O/O. THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1994 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MF8, FLAT NO.6 BDA FLATS,
BTM LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BANGALORE 560076.
12. P.SOMASHEKARA S/O LATE PUTTALINGAPPA
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 30.10.2003
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1994 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 6, 16TH CROSS 1ST MAIN,
NEAR LIC COLONY, BK NAGAR,
YESHANTHPUR, BANGALORE 560022
5
13. M.RAVI S/O A.MUNISWAMY
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 31.10.2005,
O/O. THE SR. AFA/T/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1999 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 492, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
MILK COLONY, MALLESHWARAM WEST,
BANGALORE 560055.
14. LALITHA M.K. D/O.LATE KUPPUSWAMY M.
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 03.12.2004,
O/O.THE FA & CAOS/O/CN/BNC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1995 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 1572, 9TH CROSS,
KUMURASWAMY LAYOUT,
BANGALORE 560078
15. D.KRISHNA URS S/O S.DEVARAJA URS
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 31.10.1989
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1986 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT H 003, HM TAMBOURINE,
KANAKAPURA ROAD,
BANGALORE 560078
16. PRABHU DAS V. S/O LATE U. KOTIAH,
WORKING AS S.SO(A) FROM 01.01.1994,
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/SBC,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1992),
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 164/D, TYPE III,
OPPOSITE CANTONMENT RAILWAY STATION,
VASANTH NAGAR, BANGALORE 560052
6
17. K.VIJAYAKUMAR S/O K.T.KAMALAKANNAN
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 27.02.1992,
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/MYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1988 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
RESIDING AT DOOR NO.2776/1, N.S.ROAD,
CHAMUNDIPURAM,
MYSORE 570004
18. H.G.RAMESH S/O H.S.GUNDAPPA
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 26.09.1991,
O/O.THE SR.DFM/O/MYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1988 BATCH),
AGED 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.8, 13TH BLOCK,
BEML NAGAR, SRIRAMPURA II STAGE,
MYSORE 570023.
19. KAMALAKSHA S/O T.V.PURSUSHOTHAMA,
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 15.03.1991,
O/O.THE O/O DY CE/CN/HAS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1988 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT LAKSHMINARAYANA NILAYA,
DOOR NO.323, 4TH CROSS,
JAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE,
HASSAN 573201.
20. C.M.CHENGAPPA S/O LATE C.S.MONNAPPA
WORKING AS SR.ISA FROM 26.09.1991,
O/O.THE SR.AFA/W&S/MYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA-1989 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT NO.14, 7TH BLOCK,
SHAKTI NAGAR, MYSORE,
KARNATAKA 570029.
21. C.D.SREENATH S/O K.P.DAS
7
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 04.11.2003,
O/O.THE SR.AFA/W&S/MYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1994 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.2984, 23RD CROSS,
24TH MAIN, VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STATE,
MYSORE 570017
22. P.S.KRISHNAMANI D/O SEETHARAMA ROAD,
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 27.03.1997,
O/O THE SR.AFA/W&SMYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1991 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT NO.315, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD,
NIVEDITHA NAGAR, MYSORE.
23. R.RAGHU S/O LATE RANGASWAMY
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 03.12.2004,
IN THE O/O SR.DFM/MYS,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1995 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.80,
SREE SIDDHI VIVEKANAND BLOCK,
RADHAKRISHNA NAGAR,
MYSORE 570029.
24. D.VENUGOPAL S/O A.D.DAMODARAM
WORKING AS SR.SO(A), FROM 28.04.1988,
O/O THE FA&CAOUBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
RETIRED AS AFA ON 31.07.2015,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1984 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
RESIDING AT FLAT #2, II FLOOR,
D BLOCK, RAMDATT APARTMENTS,
KESHWAPUR, HUBLI 580023.
8
25. V.R.PANDURANGI
S/O.R.H.PANDURANGI,
WORKED AS SR.SO(A) FROM 28.04.1988,
O/O THE FA & CAO/UBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
RETIRED ON 31.10.2013,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1984 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PLOT NO.30-A-1, LAXMI NIVAS,
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY,
BENGERI EXTENSION,
SHANTI NAGAR, SULLA ROAD, HUBLI
KARNATAKA 580023.
26. V.JAGANNATH S/O VENKATARAM
WORKED AS SR.SO(A) FROM 28.04.1988,
O/O THE SR.DFM/O/UBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
RETIRED, (APPENDIX IIIA 1984 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT NO.101, PARAMESHWARI APARTMENTS,
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, BENGERI,
HUBLI, KARNATAKA 580023.
27. V.P.DIVATE S/O P.M.DIVATE
WORKED AS SR.SO(A) FROM 10.04.1989 TO
30.09.2013, O/O THE AFA/W&S/UBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
RETIRED, (APPENDIX IIIA 1985 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/AT INDRA DHANU,
H.NO.16, LINGRAJ NAGAR (NORTH),
NEAR SAMUDAYA BHAVAN, HUBLI 31
28. D.SAMUEL S/O D.P.JOSEPH
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 30.07.1993,
O/O THE SR.DFM/O/UBL,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1987 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
9
R/AT PLOT NO.62, KARUNYA COLONY,
MOTHER TERESA ROAD, HUBLI 20
29. M.S.VEERABHADRAPPA
S/O M.V.SHIVASHIMPAR
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 28.10.1994
O/O THE DY.FA&CAO/CONSTN/UBL,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1989 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT H.NO.185, 5TH MAIN,
MORARJI NAGAR, GOKUL ROAD,
HUBLI 580030.
30. A.N.PARAMESHWARAPPA
S/O A.M.NARAPPA
O/O THE SR.AFA/S/O/UBL,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
RETIRED (APPENDIX IIIA 2008 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/AT NO.20, BASAVA NAGAR,
HEGGERI EXTENSION, HUBLI 580024
31. MICHAEL REBELLO
S/O LATE T.X.REBELLO
WORKING AS SR.SO(A) FROM 31.12.1999,
O/O. THE SR.DFM/O/UBL,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1995 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.37, JAUZ LAYOUT,
BENGERI EXTENSION, HUBLI 580023
32. BANDI MURALI KRISHNA
S/O LATE SHRI VEERA RABHAVULU,
WORKING AS SR.ISA FROM 18.02.1999,
O/O THE SR.AFA/S/UBL,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
(APPENDIX IIIA 1995 BATCH),
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
10
RESIDING AT NO.116, 1ST PHASE,
AKSHAY COLONY, HUBLI 580030
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V. M. SHEELAVANTH, ADV. FOR C/R1-R32)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 07.09.2017 PASSED IN
O.A.Nos.170/00049-00080/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE
(PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-"A").
THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 6.8.2018 COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCE, B.M. SHYAM PRASAD J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The Union of India (represented by the Chairman, Railway Board), the General Manager, South Western Railway and the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer (together referred to as 'South Western Railway') have filed these writ petitions impugning the order dated 7.9.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench (for short, 'the Learned Tribunal') in OA Nos.170/00049-00080/2016. The Learned Tribunal by the impugned order dated 7.9.2017 has allowed the applications filed by the respondents 11 holding that the South Western Railway shall extend to the respondents all the benefits in pari-materia with the benefits extended to the others (Sic) and that such benefits shall be extended within a period of three months.
A brief statement of the facts that would be necessary for deciding the controversy in these writ petitions is as follows:
In the year 1985, the respondents entered services with the South Western Railway as Accounts Clerks. In the year 1993, they were promoted as Junior Accounts Assistants (JAAs). Meanwhile, the respondents had passed the prescribed Appendix-IIA and IIIA (IREM) examinations. In 1996, the respondents were further promoted as Accounts Assistants (AAs) and later as Senior Section Officers (Sr. SOs) in the same year.
Further, certain employees with the South Western Railway, who were also appointed as Accounts 12 Clerks in the year 1987 (and thus were juniors to the respondents), were promoted as Junior Accounts Assistants (JAAs) in the year 1995 after they had also successfully cleared aforementioned Appendix-IIA and IIIA (IREM) examinations. In the year 1999, these employees, who were juniors to the respondents, were directly promoted as Senior Section Officers (Sr.SOs). Interestingly, these employees, who were juniors to the respondents, were directly promoted as Senior Section Officers (Sr.SOs), without intermediary promotion as Accounts Assistants (AAs). This is a material difference insofar as the present controversy is concerned.
The South Western Railway accepted the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme recommended by the VI Central Pay Commission with effect from 1.9.2008 with certain modifications. The benefit of the MACP Scheme was not extended to the respondents on the ground that the respondents, who 13 were working as Accounts Clerks had received three promotions viz., firstly as (JAA)s, secondly as Accounts Assistants (AAs), and thirdly as Senior Section Officers (Sr. SOs) between 1993 and 1996. The respondents filed their representations before the competent authorities. When such representations did not yield any result, the respondents filed the aforesaid Original Applications before the Learned Tribunal primarily on the ground that the denial of the benefit under such MACP Scheme to them was anomalous inasmuch as their juniors, who were appointed in the year 1987, and who were promoted as Senior Section Officers in the year 1999, (as against the respondents who first entered the service in the year 1985 and were promoted as Senior Section Officers in the year 1996), were given the benefit of MACP Scheme. Consequentially, the junior officers were drawing salary higher than the respondents. In continuation of this contention, it was also urged that the Railway Board was cognizant of this 14 anomaly and by its Communication dated 26.08.2013; it recommended examining the admissibility of stepping up of pay to the respondents at par with their juniors who were extended the benefits of the MACP Scheme.
The Learned Tribunal by its impugned order dated 7.9.2017 allowed the applications; the Learned Tribunal directed the South Western Railway to extend to the respondents the benefits on pari-materia with the benefits extended to others (Sic). The Learned Tribunal allowed the applications on the basis that another Original Application, namely Nos.170-00866-
00873/2015, filed by similarly placed employees as the respondents, were allowed by the Learned Tribunal on 8.6.2016 with similar directions. Moreover, the order dated 8.6.2016 was upheld by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in WP Nos.2531-75/2016. Even the SLP filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was 15 dismissed. Thus, the Learned Tribunal's directions, in such similar applications, had become final.
Mr. Ajay U. Patil, the learned counsel for the South Western Railway, pleads that the Learned Tribunal ought to have seen that the respondents were not given the benefits under MACP Scheme because of the terms of the Scheme. But even then, the respondents, who claim to be aggrieved by the terms of the MACP Scheme and the consequential denial of benefits, have not challenged the relevant terms of the MACP Scheme. So long as the terms of the MACP Scheme remained unchallenged, the respondents cannot claim benefits contrary to the terms of the MACP Scheme. The learned counsel urged that significance of this facet of the South Western Railway's case is not considered by the Learned Tribunal in the earlier proceedings. As such, the Learned Tribunal could not have allowed the respondents' applications only on the 16 ground that certain applications were allowed and the directions issued therein were implemented.
The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, asserted that the respondents in the present petitions and the applicants in the earlier proceedings before the Learned Tribunal were similarly placed. For, the seniors were refused the benefits under MACP Scheme while extending the benefits under such scheme to the juniors. Resultantly, the juniors were receiving a higher pay than the seniors. Therefore, the decision in the earlier proceedings would apply in all force to the respondents' claim.
The learned counsel also emphasized that the Railway Board had taken note of the anomaly resulting in the implementation of the MACP Scheme as aforesaid. It had recommended examining the admissibility of stepping up of pay to the seniors on par with the juniors. Further, the VII Central Pay Commission also noted this anomaly, and 17 recommended that where the senior employees had cleared both Appendix-IIA and IIIA (IREM) examinations much before the date the juniors cleared such examinations, the pay of senior employees vis-à-vis juniors should be stepped up by fixing the senior employees in the higher pay matrix. It is on the strength of these submissions, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that no grounds are made out for interfering with the Tribunal's impugned order.
The learned counsel for the South Western Railway did not join issue with the respondents on the assertion that the respondents in the present case and the applicants in the earlier proceedings before the Tribunal in OA Nos.170-00866-00873/2015 are similarly placed inasmuch as the respondents, despite being seniors vis-à-vis their juniors, who entered service and received promotion as Senior Section Officers much later than the respondents, are drawing a much lower salary than the juniors only because the benefit of 18 MACP Scheme is extended to such juniors and denied to the respondents.
Further, it is also undisputed that the Railway Board considered the anomaly of the seniors receiving a lower pay than the juniors despite being similarly situate in every aspect including the successful clearance of Appendix-IIA and IIIA (IREM) examinations except insofar as the respondents having received an intermediary promotion as Accounts Assistants. And, that the Board and VII Central Pay Commission also recommended the consideration of admissibility of stepping up of pay of the senior employees vis-à-vis juniors and fixing the senior employees in the appropriate pay matrix wherever seniors have cleared both Appendix-IIA and IIIA (IREM) examinations before such juniors.
If these essential facts remain undisputed, there would be no justifiable reason to deny to the 19 respondents the benefits of the decision/directions in the earlier proceedings in OA Nos.170-00866- 00873/2015 that have attained finality with the Madras High Court confirming the decision of the Learned Tribunal, and the dismissal of the SLP preferred by the Union of India/South Western Railway against such orders by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This would be especially so because it is also undisputed that the earlier order by the Learned Tribunal insofar as the similar applications have been implemented.
The contention that the respondents would not be entitled for the benefit of step up in the pay vis-à-vis their juniors and fixation of the seniors in higher pay matrix because they have not challenged the terms of MACP Scheme that impede grant of benefit thereunder is too tenuous in the face of the subsequent recommendations by the Railway Board as well as the VII Central Pay Commission and the implementation of 20 the directions issued by the Learned Tribunal in the case of the applicants who were, undisputedly, similarly placed as the respondents. In fact, these undisputed facts and circumstances of the case lend credence to the respondents' claim for being given the benefits in pari- materia with other similarly placed employees as recommended by the VII Central Pay Commission.
Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not persuaded to interfere with the order of the Learned Tribunal. Therefore, the writ petitions are liable to be rejected.
Accordingly, the writ petitions stand rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE JTR