Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
Satheesh E K vs M/O Human Resource Development on 14 March, 2022
1 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
O.A No. 180/00089/2020
Monday, this the 14th day of March, 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. P. MADHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. K.V. EAPEN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. Satheesh E.K., 47 years,
S/o. A.T. Karunakaran,
Catering Assistant, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Vechoochira, Pathanamthitta - 686 511.
Residing at : Elavunkal House, Mukkada (P.O),
Karikkattoor, Manimala, Kottayam - 686 544.
2. Aneesh K., 47 years,
S/o. P.K. Krishnan,
Catering Assistant, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Kulamavu, Idukki - 685 601.
Residing at : Puthuparambil, Chappattu,
Idukki - 685 505.
3. Anoop K. Francis, 38 years,
S/o. O. Francis,
Catering Assistant, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Oorakam, Malappuram - 676 519.
Residing at : Konattu House, S.L. Puram (P.O),
Cherthala, Alappuzha - 688 523.
4. Binu G. Nath, 47 years,
S/o. V.K. Gopinathan,
Catering Assistant, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Neriamangalam, Ernakulam - 686 693.
Residing at : Pournami, Kollad (P.O),
Kottayam - 686 004.
5. Vijayan P., 52 years,
S/o. Kunhambu V.,
Cook, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Periya, Kasaragode - 671 316.
Residing at Peringen House,
P.O Irinavu, Cherukunnu via, Kannur - 670 301.
6. Mohanan Pillai, 58 years,
S/o. Gangadharan Pillai,
Cook, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Kottarakkara, Kollam - 691 531.
Residing at Korattiyattu House,
Venmannoor, Anakottoor (P.O.), Ezhukone,
Kollam - 691 505.
2 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
7. Kunhikannan V., 50 years,
S/o. Chiroondan,
Mess Helper, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Periya, Kasaragode - 671 316.
Residing at Vazhavalappil House, Periya,
Kasaragode - 671 316.
8. Issac K.R., 52 years,
S/o. Ramayyan,
Cook, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Neriamangalam, Ernakulam - 686 693.
Residing at : Kandinavilayil House, Hamzy,
Thenoopattanam (P.O), Kannyakumari District.
9. Leela M.K., 52 years,
D/o. Kunjappan,
Mess Helper, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Neriamangalam, Ernakulam - 686 693.
Residing at :Kandinavilayil House, Oonnukal (P.O),
Ernakulam - 686 693.
10. G. Prathapan Nair, 60 years,
S/o. Gopalan Nair,
Catering Assistant, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Kottarakkara, Kollam - 691 531.
Residing at :Chellamanalathu, Pazhakulam (P.O),
Adoor - 691 523.
11. James J., 49 years,
S/o. Josha,
Mess Helper, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Kottarakkara, Kollam - 691 531.
Residing at Kalluthundiyil-Thekkethil Veedu,
S.N. Puram, Pavithreswaram (P.O),
Puthur, Kollam - 691 507.
12. M. Sasi, 58 years,
S/o. R. Madhanan,
Mess Helper, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya,
Neriamangalam, Ernakulam - 686 693.
Residing at : Cherumkuzhi Kizhekkadathu,
Kottarakkara, Kollam. - Applicants
[By Advocate : Mr. S. Ramesh]
Versus
1. Union of India represented by the Secretary,
Department of School Education & Literacy,
Ministry of Human Resources Department,
Sastri Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.
3 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
2. Union of India represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure,
North Block, New Delhi - 110 001.
3. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,
Represented by the Commissioner,
B-15, Institutional Area, Sector 62,
District Gautum Budh Nagar,
Noida, U.P - 201 301.
4. The Deputy Commissioner,
Navodaya Vidyala Samiti,
Hyderabad Region, 1-1-10/3,
S.P. Road, Secunderbad,
Andhra Pradesh - 500 004. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. M.K. Padmanabhan Nair, ACGSC]
The application having been heard on 24.02.2022, the Tribunal on
14.03.2022 delivered the following:
ORDER
Per: Mr. K.V. Eapen, Administrative Member This O.A has been filed by 12 applicants working as Catering Assistants, Cook and Mess Helpers in various Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNV's) located in the State of Kerala. The relief sought by them is as follows:-
"i) Call for the records leading to Annexure A-15 order and set aside the same.
ii) Issue a direction or order, declaring that the applicants are entitled to get 10% special allowance on the basis of their rendering of services in the remotest areas and catering to the need of the students of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti and denial of 10% special allowance is a violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
iii) Issue a direction or order directing the respondents to provide promotional opportunities as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in 2008 (5) SCC 100 and also as per Annexures A-8 and A-12 orders of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
iv) Issue a direction or order declaring that the applicants are entitled to the scale of pay as recommended by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti with that of Canteen Staff as provided under para 1 Sl. No. 1 of the First Schedule to Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 as per Annexure A-17."
2. In this connection, some other employees working as Catering Assistants, Cooks, Mess Helpers in the JNV's in Kerala had appeared earlier before this Tribunal in O.A No. 389 of 2009, in which, orders were passed (as produced at Annexure A-8 of this O.A) directing the respondents as follows:- 4 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
"15. Therefore, we direct the 1 st respondent to evolve a scheme to grant higher pay scale, better career prospects and fix their working hours etc. to the Catering Assistants in the Navodaya Vidyalayas. The Governing Body of the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti would have to deliberate on the issues and pass a resolution proposing the pay scales of the applicants, keeping in mind the case of the applicants as projected in this O.A and our observations above. They are also entitled to 10% of the pay or a lump sum amount of extra allowance per mensum, as they are required to be available in the Vidyalaya and work for more than 18 hours a day, on all days.
16. In the result, we direct the 1 st respondent to call meeting of the Governing body of the Jawahar Navodaya Samiti, deliberate and reconsider the following issues, as early as possible at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of this order:
(i) to grant higher pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006.
(ii) to grant special allowances @10% of pay.
(iii) to evolve a scheme for promotion as in the case of Drivers/Teachers, etc. referred to above.
(iv) to fix the working hours."
3. Subsequent to the above directions, the matter was considered by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti in the XVth meeting of the Society held on 01.07.2011. The Society recommended the grant of higher pay scale / grade pay to the Catering Assistants, Cooks and Mess Helpers. It was also recommended that the Mess Staff may be compensated for their extra efforts by way of grant of a 10% special allowance as had been granted to teaching staff. It was also noted in the minutes of the meeting (produced in the O.A at Annexure A-9) that the creation of additional posts of Catering Assistants, Cooks and Mess helpers to run the Mess in two shifts will not be economical. However, as far as the career progression of Mess Staff was concerned it was indicated that it may be taken care of through the MACP which had been introduced in the JNVs. These recommendations of the Society were sent to the Government to the Respondent No. 1 - Department of School Education & Literacy for orders/ acceptance, etc. The said Department, however, wrote back to the Commissioner, NVS (vide letter dated 26.10.2012 produced at 5 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 Annexure A-11) as follows (relevant paragraphs are re-produced):-
"2. So far as point of Sl. No. (ii & iv) are concerned i.e. to grant special allowances @ 10% of pay and to fix the working hours, the decision of the Ministry has been conveyed vide this Ministry's letter of even number dated 28.09.2011 (copy enclosed). Consequent to your letter dated 31.10.2011, the matter was re-examined and it has been observed that no special allowance is provided to Cook and Mess Helper in Sainik Schools and they do not have such a cadre. In Oak Grove Schools also, there are no similar posts of Catering Assistant. Accordingly, the request is not accepted.
3. Regarding grant of higher pay scale we.f. 01.01.2006 at Sl. No. (I) to the Catering Assistant and Mess Staff is concerned the Department of Expenditure has advised that the administrative ministry would need to provide adequate justification in the first instance to enable them to process the proposal further. Consequent to your letter dated 31.10.2011, the proposal was examined in the Department and adequate justification has not been found to consider grant of higher pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.2006.
4. So far as point at Sl. No. (iii) i.e. to evolve a scheme for promotion as in the case of Drivers/Teachers, etc. referred to above, it was decided in the meeting of the Governing Body of NVS held on 01.07.2011 that the Career progression of Mess Staff would be taken care of through MACP, which has been introduced in the Samiti. Thus the matter has not been considered by the Department."
4. After this, a Contempt Petition No. 160/2012 was filed in the O.A No. 389/2009, in this Tribunal where the above letter was produced and considered. The Tribunal noted that the respondents had issued the letter where they have stated that the aforesaid direction of the Tribunal had been considered, but the higher pay scale could not be granted. After consideration, the Tribunal ordered that it did not find any Contempt of Court in the matter, though the petitioners were given liberty to challenge before the appropriate forum if so advised. Following this some of the staff belonging to the category of Catering Assistants once again challenged the decision taken by the Department of School Education and Literacy in O.A No. 549/2013. This matter was elaborately considered though it was noted that the issue had already been decided in O.A No. 389/2009. The following direction was passed at paragraph 13 of the order dated 07.12.2015 in O.A No. 549/2013, produced at Annexure A-12.
6 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
"13. Be that as it may, the point for consideration is whether the observation by the respondents in Annexure A-14 that adequate justification was not found to consider grant of higher pay scale is correct? That plea does not appear to be correct in the light of what have been stated in Annexures A-10 and A-11 especially paragraphs 9 and 10 of Annexure A-11 wherein expenditure on outsourcing is cited as more than better pay scale and 10% special allowance. Therefore, considering the nature of the duties performed and the extra work the Mess Staff/Catering Assistant used to undertake we hold that the second respondent is to be directed to reconsider the issue to provide a higher pay scale to the applicants. If in the meantime the grievance voiced by the applicant has been considered by the VII th CPC and appropriate reliefs by way of higher pay scale has already been provided therein, the reconsideration to pay scale with effect from 01.01.2006 shall be only for the limited period, in other words, the benefits which the applicants may get on the strength of this order will be supplanted by the benefits they will get under the VII th CPC."
Subsequent to this, some of the applicants in O.A No. 549/2013 filed MA/180/777/2018 for implementation. A compliance report was filed by the respondents in the MA. It contained therein the letter produced now at Annexure A-15 impugned order in this O.A. The applicants in this O.A not being satisfied with the contents of letter at Annexure A-15 have now filed the O.A seeking the relief brought out earlier.
5. From the above narration of the sequence of events, it is clear that the applicants in this O.A (who all may not be the same as those in the previous O.As, but belonging to the same category of Catering Assistants, Cooks, Mess Helpers) have been agitating the same issue time and again. The respondents have objected to the same submitting that the matter is 'resjudicata' and cannot be agitated once again. In their reply statement they have produced details of other O.As which have been filed on the same issue before this Tribunal. They also submit that the Government of India had already considered the demand for 10% special allowance for non-teaching staff as well as the matter of higher scales of pay and promotional opportunities and had not agreed for the same for the category of the applicants. These details of the O.As filed earlier in this regard are as follows:-
7 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
Sl. Case No. Parties
No.
1 O.A No. 389/2009 Shri M.P Varghese CA & 9 Others v.
UOI & NVS
2 O.A No. 439/2009 Shri KL Cyriac, Cook & Others v.
UOI & NVS
3 O.A. No. 441/2009 Shri C.T. Pavithran, Mess Helper &
Others v. UOI & NVS
4 CP No. 160/2012 in O.A Shri M.P Varghese C.A & 9 others v.
No. 389/2009 UOI & NVS
5 O.A No. 549/2013 Shri A.V. Balachandran Nair C.A
&others v. UOI & NVS
6 O.A No. 568/2013 Shri Murlidharan Pillai O.S. & Others
v. UOI & NVS
7 MA No. 777/2018 in O.A Shri K. Aneesh C.A & Others v. UOI
No. 549/13 & NVS
6. Thus the respondents contend that the issues which have been raised and decided on earlier have once again been raised in this O.A. The letter of the Department of School Education and Literacy, Respondent No. 1 which has been impugned at Annexure A-15 is addressed to the Respondent No.3 - Commissioner NVS, New Delhi. The said letter consists of the following relevant paragraphs:-
"2. Hon'ble CAT, Ernakulam Bench in its above cited orders had taken into consideration the letter dated 31.10.2011 from Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti which had recommended higher pay scale (PB-2+GP 4200) to the Catering Assistants keeping in view the qualifications prescribed for the post of Catering Assistants vis-a-vis Staff Nurse and Librarians.
3. It has been observed by the Department of Expenditure that the qualifications in case of Staff Nurse is Senior Secondary, whereas in the case of Catering Assistant, it is Secondary School. Likewise, in case of Librarian, the qualification prescribed is Degree in Library Science, which is certainly higher than in the case of Catering Assistants. Therefore, drawing a parallel from the post of Staff Nurse and Librarian will not be appropriate.
4. Further, it is relevant to mention that the 6th CPC in para 3.8.15 of its Report had specifically made recommendation for higher pay scale in case of Nurses. The Commission had while observing that it will effect some of the existing relativities in the Nursing Cadres vis-a-vis other para medical staff, mentioned that it was a conscious decision of the Commission for giving a better deal to the Nurses in recognition of the duties performed by them. Thus, it is clear that the Commission made a specific recommendation for higher pay scale in case of Nurses in view of the nature of functions, which the Commission did not find applicable in other cases where the relativities of the pay scale would be disturbed.8 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
5. Accordingly, the Department of Expenditure is of the view that recommending a higher pay scale in the case of the Catering Staff of NVS by drawing a parallel from the case of nurses goes against the basic premise of the recommendations of the 6th CPC, which was an Expert Body handed by a retired Justice of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
6. The considered views of the Department of Expenditure on the proposal for grant of higher pay scale to the Catering Assistants as indicated above may be communicated to the Hon'ble CAT, Ernakulam Bench in compliance of its orders dated 07.12.2015 in O.A No. 549/2013."
It was after the compliance report containing the above letter was filed that the Tribunal vide its order dated 07.03.2019 in MA No. 777/2018 produced in the O.A at Annexure A-16 found that there had been substantial compliance of the direction of the Tribunal and closed the MA for implementation. However, the applicants having not accepted this position, have come up once again with additional points in this O.A based on the grounds indicated by them. They now submit that that when the NVS Society recommended higher scales of pay, the anomalies of various posts with appropriate justification was provided to the first and second respondents, as indicated in this O.A at Annexure A-17. From a reading of the information provided at Annexure A-17 it is clear that the Mess staff had been compared with the Canteen staff of the Central Government and the pay structure proposed to these posts was under Part B Section II (Part V - Canteen staff) of the CCS Revised Pay Rules, 2008. However, it is contented that without considering these aspects properly, the first and second respondents have passed the Annexure A-15 order arbitrarily. Further, it is submitted that for the post of Mess Manager in Sainik Schools, the qualification fixed is Dipolma / Degree in Catering from a recognized institution, along with 5 years experience, as can be seen at Annexure A-18. It is submitted that the Catering Assistants in the JNVs are having there qualifications and discharge the same duties and functions. However, the Mess Manager in Sainik Schools are having a pre-revised PB-I 5200-20200 + GP 9 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 2800/- which has now been revised to 29200-92300. It is submitted that without considering this aspect the order at Annexure A-15 has been passed. Another ground adduced by the applicants is that 10% Special Allowance had been recommended by the 6 th Central Pay Commission on the basis of comparable service conditions as brought out inter alia, in the copy of the recommendations produced at Annexure A-3. It has been indicated by the Commission as follows at paragraph 3 of Chapter 7.21 pertaining to the Ministry of Human Resources Development:-
"While the Commission makes no recommendation for residential allowance, because their terms of reference do not include Navodaya Vidyalayas, the Government should consider grant of a special allowance in these schools on par with that being recommended by the Commission for Military Schools in the Ministry of Defence and the Oak Grove School in the Ministry of Railways. A similar dispensation can be considered for Sainik schools as well."
7. It is submitted by the applicants that the Special Allowance had been given to the teachers, nurses, etc., mainly on the ground that the JNVs are situated in the remotest parts of the country and because teachers in the Vidyalayas have to stay on Campus along with students and have to look after their academic as well as daily needs. The Government in order to motivate the teachers and also to attract new recruits. has allowed 10% special allowance on the basic pay drawn from time to time to be paid to them. However, it is contended that the respondents have refused this allowance to the Mess Staff, like the Catering Assistants, Cooks and Mess Helpers, though it has been given to the Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, etc. The applicants submit that the Apex Court in Kichha Sugar Company Limited through General Manager v. Tarai Chini Mill Majdoor Union, Uttarakhad in (2014) 4 SCC 37 has observed in a matter relating to an allowance known as the Hill Development Allowance that taking into account the difficult climate and remote access, a decision had been 10 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 taken to grant Hill Development Allowance at 15% of the basic pay there. It is submitted therefore that a similar allowance should be also given to the catering staff, as the 10% Special Allowance given to teachers, etc., is nothing but a compensatory allowance given to them since the Vidyalayas are located in remote areas and students have to be taken care of. It is contended that the teaching staff as well as non-teaching staff have the responsibility to look after the interests of the students. In fact, the Mess Staff have even greater responsibility as they are catering to the needs of both teaching and non- teaching staff. Hence, the denial of 10% Special Allowance to the Mess staff has no justification especially as only a very limited number of mess staff maintains the mess. It is further contended by the applicants that the issue of giving a higher scale of pay to the Mess staff instead of outsourcing to maintain the mess had also not been considered though it had been so directed in the A-8 to A-12 orders of the Tribunal in O.A Nos. 389/2009, 549/2013 and other O.As. Instead of a total number of 12 members required to maintain a mess in the JNV of a certain size, only 4 members are being kept for the needs of all the students. The duty hours have not been fixed as is evident from Annexure A-7 RTI application reply. Though the Tribunal had in its orders in the O.As at Annexure A-8 and A-12 directed the respondents 1 and 2 to take a decision on the basis of its findings. This has been ignored by just giving soul reasons comparing the nurses with mess staff in Annexure A-15. The applicants have also brought out similar other grounds in the O.A as well as in their rejoinder.
8. In response, respondents have filed a brief reply signed by the Principal, JNV, Ernakulam on their behalf. The numbers of the cases filed before this Tribunal have been indicated. Some of the directions of the Government in the 11 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 matter of the allowances asked for along with a few details relating to why the Department of Expenditure has not agreed to the increase in pay scale in the case of Catering Staff by rejecting the parallel with the case of nurses have been mentioned in the reply. As regards the 10% Special Allowance to support staff, it is submitted that the matter was considered by the Ministry of Finance, which had observed that the 6 th CPC did not recommend the 10% Special Allowance to support staff of residential schools. It is submitted that the ground that Special Allowance for support staff at NVS is to be sanctioned as they are overworked and have to work seven days of a week for long hours, does not justify the grant of special allowance. As per the Ministry of Finance the issue relating to the increase of work load or long working hours needs to be resolved by the JNV by engaging more staff or outsourcing the work and not by sanctioning an additional allowance. The respondents also submit in their reply that the orders of this Bench in O.A 568/2013, C.T. Muraleedharan Pillai, O.S JNV Kollam & Others v. NVS & UOI has established that there is a rational behind giving a residential Special Allowance to teachers; that teachers have to reckon duties during night hours and also have to impart knowledge to students to clear doubts and maintain discipline and also to oversee that they make use of that time to the maximum of learning not only from books but from them as well. Thus, there cannot be any comparison and the contention that the non-teaching staff should also be equated with teachers and should also be given special compensatory allowance is found to be deficient in merit.
9. We have considered these contentions as well as heard the learned counsel for both sides. It is a fact that there has been litigation on similar 12 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 reliefs which has ended in the demand for increase in pay scales / allowances being turned down by the Government. The matter had been agitated in detail earlier in at least two O.As as brought out earlier and this Tribunal was satisfied that the orders therein were complied with in both cases. In this matter we therefore cannot once again re-consider the whole matter, ab-initio. The matter had been already elaborately considered, particularly in O.A No. 549/2013, where the orders were passed on 17.12.2015. If the applicants are still aggrieved, their only option now for them is to take up the matter once again with the respondents at the level of the Commissioner, NVS. The Commissioner could consider in turn whether, in the larger interest of the Catering Staff of the NVS, it would be necessary to take up the issues again with the Government in the Department of School Education as well as with Department of Expenditure. We leave this decision to the authorities. In our view, the only possible area where perhaps there could be a case for reconsideration if deemed necessary is in the matter of grant of Special Allowances to the catering staff. We point out that a major guiding principle behind granting this allowance to the teaching staff, librarians, nurses, etc., appears to have been that they were serving in difficult remote and rural areas. If this is indeed the main reason for grant of the allowances, an argument could perhaps been made that the catering staff are also serving in the same conditions, and thus, they should not be discriminated in the matter of drawing this allowance if they are indeed living and serving in the same area. Of course the respondents have drawn attention to the orders of this Tribunal which have held that non-teaching staff should not be equated with teachers for drawing Special Compensatory Allowance in C.T. Muraleedharan Pillai, O.S JNV Kollam & Others v. NVS & UOI supra.
13 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
10. We therefore, in light of the above, dismiss the O.A, since all issues which are relevant have been considered earlier in O.A Nos. 389/2009 and 568/2013, by this Tribunal and orders had been passed and compliance reports filed to the satisfaction of this Tribunal. No order is passed relating to costs.
(Dated, 14th March, 2022.)
(K.V. EAPEN) (P. MADHAVAN)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
ax
14 O.A No. 180/00089/2020
Applicant's Annexures
Annexure A-1 - True copy of the relevant pages of the Navodaya
Vidyala Samiti Recruitment (Revised) Rules, 2007. Annexure A-2 - True copy of the communication No.F.12-17/02- NVS (Estt.) dated 29.12.2006 of the 3 rd respondent to the Secretary, Sixth Central Pay Commission.
Annexure A-3 - True copy of the relevant extracts of the Sixth Central Pay Commission Report.
Annexure A-4 - True copy of the communication F.No. 20-1/2008- NVS(Estt-II) dated 18.11.2008 issued by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti.
Annexure A-5 - True copy of the information provided by the Department of Personnel and Training, Govt. of India through online dated 20.11.2018 under the RTI Act.
Annexure A-6 - True copy of the recommendation dated 13.04.2004 issued by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti to all Principals of JNVs.
Annexure A-7 - True copy of the communication dated 13.04.2017 issued by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti.
Annexure A-8 - True copy of the Order dated 05.08.2010 in O.A No. 389/2009 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-9 - True copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Society of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti held on 01.07.2011.
Annexure A-10 - True copy of the Order dated 22.02.2013 in C.P. © No. 160/2012 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-11 - True copy of the letter No. F.19-7/2009-UT-3 dated 26.10.2012.
Annexure A-12 - True copy of the order dated 07.12.2015 in O.A. No. 549/2013 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-13 - True copy of the Order dated 26.10.2018 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in M.A No. 180/777/2018 in O.A. No. 549/2013.
Annexure A-14 - True copy of the compliance report dated 23.01.2019 filed by the respondents before this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-15 - True copy of the Communication, F.No. 19-08/ 2013-UT-3 dated 12.12.2018 issued by the 1st respondent to the 3rd respondent.
15 O.A No. 180/00089/2020Annexure A-16 - True copy of the Order dated 07.03.2019 in M.A No. 180/777/2018 in O.A. No. 549/2013 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-17 - True copy of the Anomalies in Revised Pay Structure and Grade Pay in various posts and the justification of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti prepared by it along with Annexure A-9.
Annexure A-18 - True copy of the Notification issued by the Sainik School Nagrota-Jammu (J&K) in the year 2019.
Annexure A-19 - True copy of the Tabular Statement prepared by the applicants.
Annexure A-20 - True copy of the Order dated 23.01.2019 in O.A No. 2567/2013 of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
Annexure A-21 - True copy of the Communication dated 19.09.2019 issued by the Government of India to the Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti.
Annexure A-22 - True copy of Communication No. AF.34(45)/2015- NC dated 28th June, 2018 sent by the National Council for Hotel Management and Catering Technology to the Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti.
Annexures of Respondents NIL ************** 16 O.A No. 180/00089/2020 17 O.A No. 180/00089/2020