Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Dr Binod Bihari Palei vs Council Of Scientific & Industrial ... on 20 February, 2025
1 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023
Reserved on 19.02.2025 Pronounced on : 20.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)
THE HON'BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)
Dr. Binod Bihari Palei aged about 57 years, S/o
Late Dhaneshwar Palei, (now working as Principal
Technical Officer Gr. III (7), plot no. MIG II, 124,
At. Kanan Vihar, Phase II, P/o- Patia, P/s- Infocity,
Bhubaneswar, Dist. Khurda- 751024, Odisha.
..... Applicant
-Versus-
1. Union of India represented through Secretary,
Department of Science and Technology and
Industrial Research Anusandhan Bhavan, 2 Rafi
Ahmed Kidwai Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. Director General, CSIR Anusandhan Bhavan,-2
Rafi Ahmed Kidwai New Delhi-110001.
3. Director, CSIR- IMMT, At/Po/Ps- Acharya Vihar,
Shaheed Nagar, Bhabaneswar-13, Dist. Khurda-
751013, Odisha.
4. Bishnu Charan Sahoo, aged about 59 years, (Now
working as Controller of Administration) CSIR-
IMMT, At/Po/Ps- Shaheed Nagar, Acharya Vihar,
Bhubaneswar-13, Dist. Khurda- 751014, Odisha.
.....Respondents
For the Applicant : Mr. N.R. Routray, Counsel
For the Respondents : Mr. A.C. Deo, Counsel
2 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023
O R D E R
PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A) :
The Summation and summarization of the facts of the case are that on 21.11.2008 applicant joined as Sr. Technical Officer (3)/Group III(6) having the qualification of B.Tech in Electronics and Telecommunication. The residency period, as per the rules, for normal assessment promotion to the next higher grade of Principal Technical Officer (PTO)/Grade III (7) from Sr. Technical Officer (3) is/was five years and, thus, the applicant was eligible and entitled to PTO Grade III (7) on completion of five years w.e.f. 21.11.2013. The assessment committee held on 16.02.2016 and, on the recommendation of committee, applicant was promoted to PTO Grade III (7) w.e.f. 21.11.2013.
2. It is the case of the applicant that since he acquired the higher qualification in MS Software System from BITS, Pilani on 21.06.2014, in terms of the rules, he ought to have been promoted to PTO Grade III (7) w.e.f. 21.06.2012 instead of 21.06.2014. Therefore, he submitted representation for antedating his promotion to 21.06.2012 but no consideration was given to his representation for which he approached 3 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 this Tribunal in OA No. 594/2022 and only after the direction of this Tribunal dated 16.01.2023, respondents considered and rejected his representation vide order dated 10.03.2023 without due application of mind, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, he has approached this Tribunal in the second round of litigation with prayer as under:
"....In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal be graciously pleased to issue notice to the respondents and after hearing the counsels for the parties, quash impugned OM dated 10.03.2023 (Annex.-9) and give effect to /implement Annex.-7 by correcting its date of acquiring higher qualification from the date 21.06.2014 as per Annex.-2 instead of 16.07.2014 (under Annex.-3) to give 2 years early promotion w.e.f 21.06.2012 to the post of P.T.O Gr. III (7) under revised MANAS by quashing impugned OM dated 10.03.2023 (Annex.-
9) and consequently, to extend all career and financial benefits upto the post of Chief Scientist(V) the Applicant actually and legally entitled to for promotion as per his present basic pay at this juncture in the interest of justice:
And pass any other order(s)/ direction(s) as deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances keeping in view his legitimate right and claim for promotions under Anne. -7;"
3. The stand taken in the order of rejection dated 10.03.2023 has been reiterated in the counter by the Respondents in support of their opposition to the case of the applicant and prayed that this OA being 4 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed. Therefore, before proceeding to adjudicate the matter, for the sake of clarity, the order of rejection dated 10.03.2022 is produced below:
"...In compliance of the Order dated 16.01.2023 passed by the Hon'ble CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 594/2022 in the matter Binod Bihari Palel versus Union of India & Ors., the undersigned is directed to state that the matter has been carefully considered by Director General, CSIR and passed the following order:
I have gone through the Hon'ble CAT, Cuttack Bench Order dated 16.01.2023 In OA No. 594/2022 filed by Dr. Binod Bihari Palei, Group 111(7)/PTO versus Union of India & Ors. The Hon'ble CAT, Cuttack Bench while disposing of the OA has delivered the order dated 16.01.2023 and directed the following:
"Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that limited prayer of the applicant is that Respondent No. 3 be directed to consider the case of the applicant and take a decision to implement the OM dated 24.05.2022 (Annexure A/7) by considering the date of issue of provisional certificate as per Annexure A/2 instead of date of issue of final certificate.
Learned counsel for the respondents sought time to take instructions and file reply. However, taking into consideration the limited prayer of the applicant, the OA is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case with a direction to Respondent No. 2 to consider the case of the applicant afresh on implementation of OM dated 24.05.2022 (Annexure A/7) and consideration of his date for promotion from date of issue of provisional certificate instead of date of issue of final certificate, in accordance 5 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 with rules, and pass a speaking and reasoned order to be communicated to the applicant within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order."
I have carefully examined the request of Dr. Binod Bihari Palei for grant of the benefit of two years earlier than the normal prescribed period of assessment after acquiring the higher qualification of Master of Science (M.S.) in Software Systems from BITS, Pilani and I find that following points are of essence:
a Dr. Palei was appointed as Group III[6]/STO(3) on 21.11.2008 with the qualification of AMIE (Electronics & Communication Engg.) possessing relevant essential qualification. He has been considered for assessment promotion to the next grade ie, Gr.III(7)/Principal Technical Officer w.e.f. 21.11.2013 on completion of prescribed period of assessment as per the provisions of Revised MANAS. b. Dr. Palei acquired Master of Science (M.S.) in Software Systems from BITS, Pilani. The provisional certificate was issued on 21.06.2014 and final certificate was issued on 16.07.2014, ie after the due date of his normal assessment on 21.11.2013. Dr. Palei submitted a grievance application to the Local Grievance Committee to look into his case for the benefit of 2 years early assessment and the LGC in its meeting held on 15.03.2022 (which was also attended by Dr. Palei as an invitee) deliberated on the issue and came to the conclusion that Dr. Palei has already been promoted to next higher grade i.e. from Gr.lll (6) to Grill (7) wel. 21.11.2013 but acquired the higher qualification w.e.f. 16.07.2014, which happens to be after his normal promotion and found that his request for 2 years early assessment cannot be considered as per rules in terms of Para 2.3.4 of Revised MANAS. Dr. Palei was also convinced about the 6 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 decision of L.GC. which was duly signed by the members of LGC and Dr. Palei, as an Invitee. The decision of LGC was communicated to Dr. Palei vide IMMT OM No. 17(30)/2015-Admn dated 24.05 2022 I have also gone through the Rule position as well as clarification issued on this issue which is summarized as under
As per Para 2.3.4. of the Revised MANAS, it is stipulated that those employees who have acquired higher qualifications of the next Group, may be assessed to the next higher Grade in the same Group, two years earlier than the normal prescribed period of assessment, provided they attain the prescribed threshold. Such benefit is admissible only to those employees who acquire qualification of next higher Group by undergoing the full process of acquiring the relevant higher qualification after Joining CSIR service.
Subsequently, CSIR vide its letter No. 5- 1(812)/2022-PD dated 06.07.2022 clarified to all the CSIR Labs/Instt, about the rule position regarding admissibility of the benefit of 2 years early assessment to staff members for acquiring higher qualification for the next higher group, which is as under.
i) Acquiring of higher qualification is a prerequisite for consideration for two years earlier assessment under Para 2.3.4 of Revised MANAS: Hence, benefit of two years earlier assessment cannot be given with effect from any date prior to acquiring of higher qualification. Therefore, the assessment promotion will be effective from the date of acquiring higher qualification of the next higher group or the due date two years earlier than the normal prescribed period of assessment, whichever is later and subject to all other eligibility 7 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 conditions for grant of two years earlier assessment.
ii) The consideration for two years earlier assessment is on claim basis by the employee.
The employee can opt to avail the benefit, under Para 2.3.4, for consideration of two years earlier assessment during his immediate Assessment Promotion Cycle or opt to avail during next or later Assessment Promotion Cycle.
I also examined the OM No. 17(30)/2015-Admn.
dated 24.05.2022 issued by IMMT, Bhubaneswar and in compliance of the Hon'ble CAT, Cuttack Order dated 16.01.2023, with regard to two years early assessment of Dr. Palei taking into account the extant relevant provisions of Rules and it is regretted that the claim of Dr. Palei for 2 years early assessment w.e.f. 21.11.2011 cannot be considered as it is devoid of any merit since he has acquired the qualification of Master of Science (M.S.) in Software Systems on 21.06.2014 (the date of issue of provisional certificate) whereas he has already been promoted to PTO w.e.f. 21.11.2013, which is also the highest grade in Group III and there is no scope for further assessment promotion.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, Dr. Binod Bihari Palei, who has already has been promoted to PTO w.e.f. 21.11.2013 is not eligible to be considered for two years earlier than the normal prescribed period of assessment, as per the existing rule provisions, on or before 21.06.2014 i.e. the date of his provisional certificate of acquiring higher qualification."
4. Applicant filed rejoinder, respondents filed reply to rejoinder and the applicant has also filed written notes of submission. 8 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023
5. According to Ld. Counsel for the applicant, the normal assessment of the applicant for promotion was due on 21.11.2013 but the assessment was made on 16.02.2016 and he was promoted retrospectively w.e.f. 21.11.2013. The Local Grievance Committee considered the grievance of the applicant and recommended for grant of incentive of two years earlier than the normal assessment year because of possessing higher qualification vide OM dated 24.05.2022. He is not claiming two years early assessment w.e.f. 21.11.2011 but he is entitled to such relaxation of two years by effecting his date of promotion on the basis of the recommendation of LGC vide OM dated 24.05.2022. The promotion of the applicant was considered on 16.02.2016 and, therefore, the clarification dated 06.07.2022 cannot be made applicable to him. In terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in the cases of Y.V.Rangia, (1983) 3 SCC 284, P.Mahendra & Ors, AIR 19990 SC 405, and Arjun Singh Rathore Vs B.N.Chaturvbedi, (2008) SCC (L&S) 387, the vacancies ought to have been filled up as per the prevalent rules and subsequent change of the rules cannot be made applicable to the preexisting vacancy. Therefore, according to the 9 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 applicant, he is entitled to the promotion w.e.f. 21.06.2012 instead of 21.06.2013. Therefore, he has reiterated the prayer made in the OA.
6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the respondents has submitted that the entitlement of the applicant for promotion to PTO Grade III (7) w.e.f. 21.11.2013, i.e on completion of five years in the lower grade, is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that he acquired higher qualification on 21.06.2014. On the recommendation of the Assessment Committee held on 16.02.2016, the applicant was granted promotion to PTO Grade III (7) w.e.f. 21.11.2013, which he accepted without any demur. The two years relaxation is applicable after acquiring the higher qualification. Since the applicant was already promoted on 26.11.2013, i.e. prior to acquiring higher qualification on 14.06.2014, his prayer became redundant as per rules. It is further submitted that the recommendation of the LGC Committee vide OM dated 07.04.2021 was to the effect that request of the applicant for two years early assessment can be considered only from the date of acquiring higher qualification for next higher group, i.e. from 16.07.2014, subject to fulfillment of other terms and conditions as per rules. Plain reading of the said OM, it is established that there was no such recommendation 10 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 that, based on the acquiring such higher qualification, the promotion already given to him on 26.11.2013 should be rescinded by giving him promotion to any earlier date. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the relief claimed by him.
7. We have considered the submission of the parties and perused the record. We find that the applicant got the higher qualification on 21.06.2014, i.e. much after his promotion to PTO Gr.III (7), i.e. on 21.11.2013. The CSIR letter dated 06.07.2022 makes it abundantly clear that two years early assessment under para 2.3.4 of revised MANAS cannot be given effect to prior to acquiring higher qualification. Therefore, since the applicant got the promotion just after completion of five years, i.e. on 21.11.2013 because of his acquiring higher qualification much thereafter, his prayer to antedate his date of promotion two years earlier than his actual eligibility is his misconception. We also fail to understand as to how the decisions relied on by him has any application to the present case. Merely because the applicant acquired higher qualification before the assessment made by the Assessment Committee for promotion of the applicant w.e.f. 21.11.2013 is hardly of any ground to accede to his 11 O.A.No. 260/00245 of 2023 request. It is not a case that the applicant has got the promotion without giving two years relaxation after acquiring the required higher qualifications. The rules governing the field necessarily will have to be posterior to the acquisition of the qualification. Acquiring higher qualification is a ground for giving the benefit of two years relaxation for upward movement therefrom and not for backward. Retroactive consideration for acquiring higher qualification is not a condition precedent in the rules. We also find that the respondents considered the representation of the applicant and rejected the same in a well reasoned and speaking order giving no scope for this Tribunal to interfere in the same.
8. In the result, this OA stands dismissed. No costs.
(Pramod Kumar Das) (Sudhi Ranjan Mishra) Member (Admn.) Member (Judl.) RK/PS