Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
J S Surjuse vs M/O Defence on 22 January, 2020
oe
Sie .
] ff
ees
i OA No.021/00716/2014
IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH: HYDERABAD
Original Application Nos. 021/00716/2014
_ Hyderabad, this the 22" day of January, 2020
HON'BLE MR. ASHISH KALIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR.B.V.SUDHAKAR, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
a anit
. J.&.Surjuse, S/o Late Shiva Ram Surjuse,
Age : 62 years, Occ: Retd. Tailor, 2 Training Batallion,
EME Centre, Secunderabad.
2. M.Devakar, S/o M.Ruprappa,
e Age :55 years, Occ : Tailor, 1 Training Batallion,
EME Centre, Secunderabad.
poe
3. A.Kishore Kumar, S/o A.Ponnaiah,
Age : 53 years, Occ : Tailor, 3 Training Batallion,
EME Centre, Secunderabad.
4. K.Krishna Murthy, S/o Govinda Swamy,
Age : 71 years, Occ : Tailor,
Head Quarters, 1 EME Centre, Secunderabad.
5. T Ravi, S/o Late Eshwaraiah,
Age : 53 years, Occ: Tailors,
1 EME Centre, Head Quarters, Secunderabad.
. 6. V.Govardha, $/o V.Krishna Murthy,
ae Age : 53 years, Occ ; Tailor,
° EME Depot Batallion, Secunderabad.
7. K.Kannaiah, S/o Lat Krishna,
Age : 54 years, Occ: Tailor,
Headquarters, 1 EME Centre, Secunderabad.
& D.G.Saheb, 5/o Saheb,
Age : 51 yrs, Occ : Tailor,
Mic EME, Secunderabad. .. Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr.M.V. Krishna Mohan & Mrs.Anuradha)
Vs.
° OA No.021/00716/2014
1. The Union of india,
Rep. by its Secretary, M/o Defence,
Sena Bhavan, New Delhi.
2. The Commandant,
Head Quarters HO4,
EME Centre, Secunderabad.
3. The Area Accounts Officer,
{CDA Controller of Defence Accounts),
Secunderabad.
4. The Director General,
Electrical & Mechanical Engineer (EME-Civid),
ARMY Headquarters, New Delhi. . Respondents
{By Advocate : Mrs.k.Rajitha, $r.CGSC)
3 DOA No. O21/00716/2014
ORAL ORDER
{As per Hon'bie Mr.Ashish Kalin, Judicial Member} :
. ' The non-industrial workers are granted five scales by the Government of india, Ministry of Defence vide its order dated 22.08.1983 viz., Unskiled : Rs.196-220, Semiskilled Rs.216-290, Skilled Rs.260-356, Highly Skilled-li ; Rs.330-480 and Highly Skilled-} Rs.380-560. The grievance of the applicants is that after they have got promotion of skilled labour they are not considered for further post of Highly Skiled-l or H. For that they have cited a judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of india In W.P.(C) No.492/1991 Sri Prabhulal and another Vs. Union of India and others. The petitioners who are boot makers claim that by virtue of the fetter dated 16.10.1984 wherein it has been mentioned that President has accorded sanction to the upgradation of certain jobs which Is that of boot makers ds from Semi Skilled Rs.210-290 to Skilled grade 260-400 w.e.f. 16.10.1984 and they are too entitled to be placed in the higher grade. Even though there are directions of Haon'ble Supre Court, the respondents were not acceded to their request and they are stagnated in the level of skilled labourer. Feeling aggrieved by this, they have made detailed representations and filed this auplication for the following relief :
"Py direct the respandents to implement the pay scales from time to time and alsa the instructiens issued thraugh implementing of the MAC® formulated in the &Y spe ta the agplicants es the anplicants are ety OA No, a 02007 16/2 O14 fon, £5 eligible as per rules and instructians given specifically issued and in order No. B/21892/44/1/EME Ciy-f€-2). dated 17.02.2014 by declaring the action of the respondents in nat implementing the orders as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional, viclative of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution and consequently direct the reapandents to consider thes apaticants for the upgredetion as per their eligibility and entitlement".
2. Notices were issued. Respondents out agpearance, fled their } Sl\reply and they have submitted that the applicants were appointed as Tailors in 1 EME Centre and EME Depot. As ser the Hon'ble Supreme Court order in Prabhulal Vs. Union of India and others (WP No.492 of 1991) Hon'ble High Court of AP & Telangana State, Hyderabad order dated 14.06.2012 (WP No.4065 of 2002), pay scales of the applicants were upgraded w.e.f. 16.10.1981 and arrears were also paid in the pay scale of Rs. 260-6-290-EB-390- 10-400 and subsequently ACP/MACP have also been granted.
3. The basic contention raised by the learned counsel for the respondents during the course of arguments is that as per the Gazette notification of the recruitment rules issued by the respondents w.et. 24.12.2011 the requisite qualifications sre (1} matriculation or equivalent (2) Should be able to carry out all textile and leather repair and replacement on the equipment and boots. Which is relevant in the present context, Learned counsel for the respondents further impressed upon this Tribunal that the persons who have not requisite qualification cannat Se considered for further promotion. Be that as & may. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that as per the various Supreme Court judgements one should not be deprived of promotional based avenues ~ oe Bass Se ¥ % % 7 Leas"
6
the ty OA No.021/00716/2014 even MACP Scheme also envisages thhes yotions, three upgradations in the service careér.
4, However, after considering the rival contentions, we are of a x x the view that the ends of justice would be met that this matter may de a send to High Power Committes to examine and consider the one time ©S/ relaxation of the applicant because there is not much difference in the "
educational qualification of 8°" class ar 10° class.
This exercise shall be completed within a period of five months frors the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the same shall be communicated to the applicant. aot if itis found favourable that is the and of the matter.
5. With the above ooservation, OA js dispo sed of accordingly.
'There shall be no order as to costs