Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shriom Singh vs Union Of India Through on 14 February, 2012
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi.
OA-1747/2011
Reserved on : 10.02.2012.
Decided on : 14.02.2012.
Honble Sh. G. George Paracken, Member (J)
Honble Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A)
Shriom Singh,
S/o late Sh. Daya Nand,
R/o A-481, Gopal Nagar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-43. .. Applicant
(through Sh. A.K. Trivedi, Advocate)
Versus
1. Union of India through
Its Secretary,
Ministry of Defence,
South Block, New Delhi.
2. The Chief Engineer,
HQ Chief Engineer, Western Command,
Chandimandir, Chandigarh.
3. The Garrison Engineer (North),
Air Force Station, Palam,
Delhi Cantt-110010. .. Respondents
(through Sh. T.A. Ansari, Advocate)
O R D E R
Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A) The applicant, who is working as a Junior Engineer with the respondents, has filed this application with a prayer to set aside the order dated 05.10.2010 by which his representation for correct pay fixation was rejected and also for a direction that his pay should be fixed at Rs. 13860/- in the pay scale of Rs.7450-11500/- giving the grade pay of Rs.4600/- in terms of the order dated 11.11.2009 of the Ministry of Defence and the O.M. dated 13.11.2009 of the Ministry of Finance.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the prayer of the applicant for fixation of his pay in the pay scale of Rs.7450-11500/- (Pre-revised) with the grade pay of Rs. 4600/- as on 01.01.2006 has been allowed in the impugned order dated 05.10.2010, yet the actual fixation does not correspond with the instructions of the Government. He cites the O.M. dated 13.11.2009 according to which employees in the pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500/- will be granted the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 7450-11500/- and given the grade pay of Rs. 4600/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and their pay scale will be accordingly fixed in terms of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008. He has drawn our attention to the statement filed at page-13 which indicates that the pay of an employee drawing salary at Rs.7450/- as on 01.01.2006 will be fixed at Rs.13860/- having the grade pay of Rs.4600/-. Accordingly his pay should have been fixed at Rs. 13860/- whereas in the statement given by the respondents it has been fixed at Rs. 12840/- although the same grade pay of Rs. 4600/- was granted and the revised pay band of Rs.9300-34800/- in PB-II was also allowed. According to him, as per the letter dated 06.05.2010 of the respondents (Annexure A/5, page-17) it should have been Rs. 13860/- after grant of benefit of bunching, which has not been allowed.
3. From the counter-reply filed by the respondents, it is seen that there is no dispute about the admissibility of the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 7450-11500/- and determination of the pay as on 01.01.2006 in the Pay Band-II with grade pay of Rs. 4600/-. The only dispute is whether the pay fixation has been correctly done. From the letter of the respondents at page-17 and the re-fixation statement at page-18, it is seen that after giving the benefit of bunching the pay should have been determined at Rs.13860/-, which has not been done. The statement at page-13 indicates the replacement level for Rs.7,450/- at Rs.13,860/- which is the claim of the applicant. Besides, the statement filed by the respondents at page-26 shows the replacement pay for Rs. 7,300/- at Rs. 13,580/- and for Rs.7,500/- at Rs. 13,950/-. There is no corresponding scale for Rs. 7,450/- which should be between Rs.13,580/- and Rs. 13,950/-, but it should be necessarily in between.
4. Since there is no dispute about the principle to be followed and the dispute is about the admissibility of bunching facilities or actual determination of the pay, we remit the matter to the competent respondent authority to re-examine the issue and re-fix the pay of the applicant correctly in terms of government instructions and provisions of the revised pay rules. They may also look into the statement filed at page-13 which indicates that the pay of the applicant is to be fixed at Rs.13860/-. The respondents are directed to pass a speaking order under intimation to the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The O.A. is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
(Dr. A.K. Mishra) (G. George Paracken) Member (A) Member (J) /Vinita/