Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Sampuran Singh vs M/O Defence on 16 August, 2018
Sub: increments 1 OA No.200/00326/2014
Reserved
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.200/00326/2014
Jabalpur, this Thursday, the 16th day of August, 2018
HON'BLE SHRI NAVIN TANDON, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1.Sampuran Singh, aged about 69 years,
S/o Late Shri Bhajan Singh, R/o 23 Laxmi Parisar,
Katanga, District Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001
2. Subhash Chandra, Aged about 67 years,
S/o Late Shri R.C.Sharma, R/o C-310, Apsara Apartment,
South Civil Lines, District Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001
3. Surendra Singh Rait, Aged about 68 years,
S/o Late Pyara Singh Rait, R/o 884, Gorakhpur,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001
4. Pushp Kumar Jain, Aged about,
S/o Late Shri Shikharchandra, R/o Flat No. 501,
Vijay Tower, Ranjhi, Jabalpur (M.P.)-482009
5.Smt. Anita Khatri, W/o K.K. Khatri,
Age-62 years, R/o H.No. 1720, Narsingh Nagar,
Ranjhi, Jabalpur, M.P.
6. Arvindra Kumar, Aged about 62 years,
S/o Late Shri J.P.Patel, R/o 692, Katanga
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001
7. Jai Kishan Lall, Aged about 63 years,
S/o Late B.M.Lall, R/o 59 Akash Enclave,
Near Sport Club Tilheri, Mandla Road,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001
8.Dilip Kumar Ghate, Aged abut 64 years,
S/o Late Shri Premnath Ghate, R/o Sargam Apartment,
Wright Town, Jabalpur (M.P.)-482002
Page 1 of 14
Sub: increments 2 OA No.200/00326/2014
9. Krishna Kumar Ratra,
Aged about 66 years,
S/o Late Shri Ramchandra Ratra,
R/o 208 Rajul Plots,
Gyan Vihar, Narmada Road,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482002
10. Pramod Kumar Shrivastava,
Aged about 66 years,
S/o Late Shri G.P.Shrivastava,
R/o C-76, Samdariya Residency,
Shatabdipuram, MR-4 Road,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482002 -Applicants
(By Advocate -Shri Pankaj Dubey)
Versus
1. Union of India,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Defence,
New Delhi-110011
2. The Chairman,
Ordinance Factory Board,
10-A, Aucklnad Road, Kolkata-700001
3. The General Manager,
Vehicle Factory,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482009
4. The General Manager,
Grey Iron Foundry,
Jabalpur (M.P.)-482009
5. The General Manager,
Ordnance Factory,
Khamariya, Jabalpur (M.P.)-482009 -Respondents
(By Advocate -Shri N.K.Mishra)
(Date of reserving the order:-01.05.2018)
Page 2 of 14
Sub: increments 3 OA No.200/00326/2014
ORDER
By Ramesh Singh Thakur, JM:-
By way of this Original, the applicants are aggrieved against the order dated 04.02.1969 (Annexure A-3). Hence they filed this Original Application.
2. The applicant has prayed for the following reliefs in this Original Application:-
"8. Relief Sought:
(8.1) To grant the benefit of circular dated 04.02.1969. (8.2) To grant the benefit of the judgment dated 07.10.99. (8.3) To call for the entire record of the case for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.
(8.4) To grant the increment to the applicants from the dated of acquiring degree.
(8.5) To grant arias of increment from the dated of entitlement at the rate of 18% interest. (8.6) Cost of the application."
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants Nos. 1 to 6 and 10 were working as supervisor with the respondents-Vehicle Factory Jabalpur. The applicants Nos. 7 & 8 were working as supervisor with the respondent-Grey Iron Foundry. The applicant No.9 has worked with Ordnance Factory Khamaria, Jabalpur. All the applicants have acquired bachelor's degree in engineering in their respective years prior to 01.04.1993.The applicants are Page 3 of 14 Sub: increments 4 OA No.200/00326/2014 entitled to get three advance increments on obtaining the bachelor's degree in engineering, a copy of the service certificates are filed as Annexure A-2.
4. The applicants contended that as per the policy of the respondents notified in Memorandum dated 04.02.1969 "A person who acquired a degree in engineering/AMIE while they are serving in a non-gazetted technical/scientific grade shall have their pay reaffixed with effect from the date on which they acquired the above mentioned qualification, at this stage in his scale of pay which would give him three advance increments." A copy of the letter is attached as Annexure A-3.
4.1 Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that vide office memorandum dated 28.06.1993 (Annexure A-4) the Department of Personnel and Training have issued a circular whereby they indicated that Ministries switching over from the existing system of advance increments based incentive to a new system of one time Lump-sum incentive, which has been made effective from the financial year 1993-94 mentioning that the present system of giving advance increments shall be replaced by grant of lump-sum amount as incentive.
4.2 It has been further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the new scheme of granting one lump-sum amount Page 4 of 14 Sub: increments 5 OA No.200/00326/2014 for acquired higher qualification has been effective from the financial year 1993-94 and person who have acquired higher qualification on or after 01.04.1993 only are to be granted Lump- sum amount as incentive under the scheme. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the respondents have wrongly followed the circular dated 26.09.1995 (Annexure A-5) wherein at Para 2 it is stated that "the employees who have already acquired the higher qualification of degree in engineering AMIE after joining service will also be eligible for the incentive of Rs. 4000/- in Lump-sum".
4.3 Learned counsel for the applicant further averred that there is an omission/fault on the part of the respondents, that the person having higher qualification prior to 01.04.1993 should have received the benefits in terms of O.M. dated 04.02.1969, in that case the incentive of 4000/- in Lump-sum is not admissible. The payment of Rs. 4000/- as incentive for acquiring higher qualification was not justified in the case of applicants but respondents had not taken timely action for giving incentives to the applicants as per the existing rules. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that a similar matter has already been decided by the Ernakulam Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. NO. 755/97 passed on 07.10.1999 in respect of the case of S. Ramaswami vs. Page 5 of 14 Sub: increments 6 OA No.200/00326/2014 Union of India & Ors. It is submitted that the applicant therein was granted the benefit of the relevant scheme in compliance of the orders of this Hon'ble Tribunal. A copy of the order dated 07.10.99 is annexed as Annexure A-6.
4.4 Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that several communications had been made to the respondents with regard to grant of three advance increments but no action has been taken by the respondents. A copy of the communication is filed herewith as Annexure A-8.
5. The main ground for challenge by the applicants in this O.A. is that the action of the respondents in not following the circular dated 04.02.1969 is arbitrary illegal and discriminatory. The applicants are put to discrimination as the similarly placed persons have been giving the benefits of the circular of 1969. The applicants made repeated representation which has not been decided by the respondents.
6. The respondents have filed their Para-wise reply in which they submitted that seven applicants (from Sl. No. 1 to 6 and 10) on acquiring higher qualification were granted lumpsum incentive of Rs. 4000/-on 07.03.1996 in accordance with the orders given by the Ordnance Factory Board Kolkata vide letter dated 18.10.1995 (Annexure R-1). After receiving the amount the applicants on Page 6 of 14 Sub: increments 7 OA No.200/00326/2014 07.03.1996 (Annexure R-2) had given an undertaking that "the incentive of Rs. 4000/- received by us is acceptable subject to the final outcome of the O.A.340/1991 pending at CAT, Jabalpur. The service particulars given by the applicants are correct except the Applicant No.2 who has attained AMIE degree in the year 1983 and not in the year 1987 as mentioned in the instant O.A, the applicant No. 6 was appointed as Examiner (IE's) and not as Supervisor "B" as mentioned in the instant O.A. and the applicant No. 10 was appointed as draftsman and not as Supervisor "B". 6.1 Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the Bachelor degree acquired by the applicants is correct except of applicant No. 2 who has obtained degree in the year 1983 and not in 1987. The applicants were granted lump-sum incentives of Rs. 4000/- on 07.03.1996. In accordance with OFB order dated 18.10.1995 and the same was accepted by the applicants, on protest by giving an undertaking dated 15.03.1996 that the lump sum received by them is subject to the outcome of O.A. No. 340/1991 pending before CAT Jabalpur. However, after one month the Hon'ble CAT on 24.04.1996 dismissed the O.A. in which the applicants Nos. 3, 5 & 9 & 10 in the instant case were also party in O.A. No. 340/1991 (Annexure R-3). Since then and till filing of the present O.A. the applicants did not communicate regarding receipt Page 7 of 14 Sub: increments 8 OA No.200/00326/2014 of incentive of Rs. 4000/-. Neither any reply nor any confirmation regarding the acceptance of such incentive was given by these applicants, which means that the applicants were fully satisfied with the lump sum incentive they had received.
7. The applicants have filed their rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents, wherein it is submitted that the respondents for the purpose of defending their case and preventing the applicants from grant of their legitimate claim in terms of entitlement and parity as well are intending to misconstrue the cause of action which is not permissible in the present case. A kind attention of this Hon'ble Tribunal in invited to Annexure A-7, the persons mentioned therein have been given the benefits vide communication dated 18.08.2010 and 17.02.2014. The present applicants who are similarly placed are seeking parity in terms of the benefits given to them and therefore there is no question of the claim being submitted at a belated stage.
7.1 It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Ordnance Factory Board vide communication dated 18.09.2013 has sent a proposal mentioning several communications including the names of the applicants and therefore, it was very much under consideration. A copy of the order dated 18.09.2013 (Annexure A-9) is filed alongwith the Page 8 of 14 Sub: increments 9 OA No.200/00326/2014 rejoinder. It is further submitted by the applicant that the MoD while granting the benefit to Shri Pulak Kumar Dutta has taken a note of delay held by the O.F.B. and has made a communication dated 18.11.2009 taking it to be a serious issue and against the interest of the similarly placed employees. A Copy of the said communication is marked with rejoinder at Annexure A-12.
8. The respondents have filed the additional reply to the rejoinder filed by the applicants, wherein it is submitted by the respondents that the applicants on 07.03.1996 had given an undertaking that incentive of Rs. 4000/- is acceptable on protest subject to final outcome of O.A. No. 340/1991. This Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 24.04.1996 dismissed the said case holding that there was no reason for directing the respondents to grant incentives as it prevalent in other Ministries. The respondents further averred that perhaps the applicants are not aware that DOPT vide letter dated 28.06.1993 had replaced the system for granting 3 advance increments to a lump sum incentive from the current financial year and the Ordnance Factory Board, Kolkata vide letter dated 18.10.1995 had given direction that the employees who have acquired higher qualification in Engineering/AMIE may be granted lump sum incentive of Rs. 4000/-.
Page 9 of 14
Sub: increments 10 OA No.200/00326/2014 8.1 Learned counsel for the respondents further contended that it
was specifically informed to the applicants that as he has claimed and accepted the incentive of Rs. 4000/- lump sum on acquiring degree in Engineering, therefore his request for grant of another benefits for the same reason can not be accede to at this belated stage. A copy of the order dated 19.05.2014 is filed and marked as Annexure RR-1. With regard to consideration of representation submitted by the applicants, it is submitted that the Board as per the directives of the Hon'ble Court, considered and decided the representation by passing a speaking order on 19.05.2014 in accordance with law. Thus, the averments made by the applicants in this O.A. are devoid of any merit.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the pleadings and the documents available on record.
10. Regarding the acquiring of higher qualification by the applicant, there is no dispute. It is admitted fact that all the applicants are working under the respondents. It is also admitted by the respondents that the applicant No.2 has obtained degree in the year 1983 instead of 1987. It is also admitted fact by both the parties that earlier vide notification dated 04.02.1969 (Annexure A-3) three advance increments were to be given to the employees Page 10 of 14 Sub: increments 11 OA No.200/00326/2014 serving in a non-gazetted technical/scientific grade and their pay will be refixed with effect from the date on which they acquired a degree in engineering/AMIE. It is also admitted fact that vide notification dated 28.06.1993 (Annexure A-4), Department of Personnel and Training have issued a circular, whereby the existing system of advance increments were changed to a new system of one time lump-sum incentive, which have been made effective from the financial year 1993-1994.
11. It is further an admitted fact that the respondents have followed the circular dated 26.09.1995 (Annexure A-5), whereby in Para 3 it is stated that, "the employees who have already acquired the higher qualification of degree in engineering/AMIE after joining service will also be eligible for the incentive of Rs. 4000/- in Lump-sum".
12. The main contention of the applicant is that all the applicants have acquired degree in engineering/AMIE before the cut off date i.e. 28.06.1993(Annexure A-4). The counsel for the applicant submits that as per Annexure A-3, all the applicants are entitled for three advance increments because they all have acquired the degree in engineering/AMIE and notification dated 28.06.1993, (Annexure A-4) is only applicable after 28.06.1993.
Page 11 of 14
Sub: increments 12 OA No.200/00326/2014
13. On the other side, the respondents have submitted that vide Annexure R-2 dated 07.03.1996 the applicants are being paid/granted lumpsum incentive of Rs. 4000/- and after receiving the amount the applicant had given an undertaking that the incentive of Rs. 4000/- received by them is acceptable subject to final outcome of Original Application No. 340/1991, which was pending at Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench. It has been further submitted by the counsel for the respondents that the said Original Application No. 340/1991 has been dismissed by Central Administrative Tribunal Jabalpur Bench on 24.04.1996 and since then till filing the present Original Application the applicant did not communicate regarding receipt of incentive of Rs. 4000/-. The contention of the applicant is that the similarly placed persons have been given the benefits vide communication dated 18.08.2010 and 17.02.2014. The applicant has also relied upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam in Original Application No. 755/1997 passed on 07.10.1999 (Annexure A-6) in the matters of S. Ramaswamy (Supra) and the said order of the Tribunal has been complied with and similarly placed persons has been given the benefits of relevant scheme. The counsel for the applicant has also submitted that vide order dated 18.09.2013 (Annexure A-9) the Ordnance Factory Page 12 of 14 Sub: increments 13 OA No.200/00326/2014 Board has sent a proposal mentioning several communications including the name of the applicant which is under consideration with the respondents.
14. The counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench in Original application No. 1075/2014 dated 11.11.2014 in the matters of Shri S.K.Mudgil vs. Union of India and others, whereby the Hon'ble Tribunal has granted the same relief which was granted to the similarly placed persons after 18 years.
15. So the contention of the replying respondents that the applicant has not pressed the issue after granting the lumpsum incentive of Rs. 4000/-, is not sustainable due to the fact that undertaking was given by the applicant on protest. Moreover, relying upon the judgment in the matters of S.K.Mudgil (Supra), the same issue has been discussed.
16. In view of the above discussion we have considered the submissions of rival parties and perused the material on record. We have also carefully gone through the judgment in order passed by the Coordinate Bench of CAT, Ernakulam in the matters of S. Ramaswamy (Supra) and order passed by the Coordinate Bench at Bangalore in the matters of S.K.Mudgil (Supra), we have no Page 13 of 14 Sub: increments 14 OA No.200/00326/2014 alternative except to allow the Original Application by following the order passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of CAT.
17. Accordingly, the Original Application is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant the benefit of circular dated 04.02.1969 from the date of acquiring degree by the applicants with all consequential benefits within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No order as to costs.
(Ramesh Singh Thakur) (Navin Tandon)
Judicial Member Administrative Member
rn
Page 14 of 14