Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
K.K. Gagneja, Retd. Sr. Supdt. Of Post ... vs Union Of India (Uoi), Through ... on 25 April, 2007
ORDER Shanker Raju, Member (J)
1. Applicant, a JTS officer, seeks from 10.12.2002, i.e., from the date of his regular promotion in JTS in Indian Postal Service Group 'A' in the pay scale of Rs. 8,000-13500, allowances under the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' for the duties discharged on assumption of the post of STS, Group 'A' in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- till his superannuation on 31.1.2006.
2. Learned Counsel of applicant has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in Selvraj v. Lt. Governor, Port Blair and Ors. JT 1998 (4) SC 500 to contend that discharge of duties by an order on higher post would entail pay and allowances attached to that post as a difference.
3. Learned Counsel would also contend by relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Bhagwan Dass and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. 1987 (3) SLJ SC 93 to contend that applicant when doing same work as others, mere mode of recruitment when the duties discharges are identical, would not deny equal pay for equal work.
4. Learned Counsel of respondents, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the contentions and relying upon memoranda dated 22.7.1999 and 17.10.2001 contended that as per Indian Postal Service (Amended) Rules, 1997 posts in STS, which could not be filled up on account of officers with requisite years of service are not available and if JTS officers are available be added temporarily to the STS and filled up by promotion, then on interchangeability of the posts the status of the posts in Group 'a' JTS is linked to the status of officers in STS and there is no question of ad hoc promotion of JTS officers to STS.
5. On careful consideration of the rival contentions of the parties, admittedly JTS is a feeder category for STS and as applicant has discharged on promotion as JTS functions and duties of STS, he is entitled in a promoted post the pay scale attached to that post as a difference, as 'equal pay for equal work' is a constitutional doctrine under the Directive Principles of State Policy and has been recognized by the Apex Court in Bhagwan Dass (supra) denying on discharge similar duties as that of STS the pay scale attached to it would be an invidious discrimination, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Any rule to this effect, if contrary to the above principles of equality, would have to give way.
6. In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we dispose of this OA with a direction to respondents to re-examine the claim of applicant, in the light of the above directions by passing a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as we do not advert to the reasoning given by the respondents in their order dated 14.10.2005. No costs.