Central Information Commission
Badal Kanti Sengupta vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment on 30 October, 2024
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MLABE/A/2023/139099
Shri BADAL KANTI SENGUPTA ... अपीलकताा /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Ministry of Labour & Employment
Date of Hearing : 29.10.2024
Date of Decision : 29.10.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31.03.2023
PIO replied on : 21.04.2023
First Appeal filed on : 29.04.2023
First Appellate Order on : 08.05.2023
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd : 18.09.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.03.2023 seeking information on following points:-
1) "Whether the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of all staff, official of all the Departments of all the respective Government Organization [i.e All Class III Supervisory staff of all Departments of same Government Organization] should be equal and same on the principle of Equal Pay for Equal work? If yes then copy of Notification enforced and circulated by the Ministry of Labour and Employment in reference to Para, Section of Labour Act, Equal Remuneration Act 1976, Payment of Wages Act 1936 etc. may kindly be provided to undersigned.
2) In Most Government Organization the staff are classified as Frontline Essential staff and Non- Essential Clerical Ministerial staff. The frontline staff are the backbone of the concerned organization as they deal directly with public and comes under contact with public face to face which involves risk factors. Further the frontline staff gets only one weekly off. On the other hand the Non Essential staff of the concerned organization are also classified as Ministerial staff which does not have direct contact face to face with the public and gets two weekly off [i.e Saturday and Sunday]. So under which Para.
Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936 etc. Labour Act etc the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of Essential Frontline staff should be more than the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of Non Essential clerical staff and Ministerial staff? Copy of Notification if any may kindly be provided to undersigned.
3) When the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of Class III Supervisory staff of a particular department of an Organization is more than the Pay Scale and Page 1 Grade Pay of Class III Supervisory staff of other departments of the same Organization, then under which Para, Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936, Labour Act and Equal Remuneration Act 1976 etc. has been violated?
4) When the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of class III Supervisory staff of a particular department of an Organization is equal than the Pay Scale and Grade Pay of class II gazetted officer of other departments of the same organization, then under which Para, Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936, Labour Act and Equal Remuneration Act 1976 etc has been violated?
5) When the Pay Scales and Grade Pay of class III Supervisory Staff of a particular Department of a Government Organization were upgraded to Rs 4800/- and further upgraded to Rs.5400/- w.e.f 01/01/2006 and w.e.f 01/01/2016 respectively as per the recommendation of VI Central Pay Commission and VII Central Pay Commission respectively. However the said Pay Scale and Grade Pay of Class III Supervisory staff of other departments of the same Government Organization were upgraded to Rs 4800/- and Rs 5400/- after a lapse and Gap of almost 10 to 16 years resulting a Huge Gap of Inequality of Income, hence which Para, Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936 labour Act and Equal Remuneration Act 1976 etc has been violated? Further under which Para, Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936, Labour Act, Equal Remuneration Act 1976 etc. the above said Huge Gaps of Inequality of Income can be reduced and regularized as equal work for equal pay with retrospective effect?
6) As per the recommendation of VI Central Pay Commission and VII Central Pay Commission w.e.f 01/01/2006 and 01/01/2016 respectively there has been Anomaly in the Pay Scales and Grade Pay of various staff, Officials of the concerned departments of all Central Government Organization. Hence for regularisation the Pay Scale and Grade Pay on the basis of Equal work for Equal Pay the Anomaly Committee has been nominated by the Union Ministry of Finance. However till date the Anomaly Committee has not submitted it's report to the Ministry of Finance. Since there has been an Anomaly in Pay Scale and Grade Pay of staff, official of Central Government organization, hence which Para, Section of Payment of Wages Act 1936, Labour Act and Equal Remuneration Act 1976 etc there has been Violation?
7) In Central Government Organization there are various departments in which a particular department will look after Recruitment of staff, Drawal of Salary and Pay of Staff, Transfer and Promotion of staff, Enforcement of policy matter, Establishment in reference to Rules and Regulation of Central Government? Whether the above work of a particular department should be Universally Centralized in all aspect? If yes then in which Para, Section of Labour Act, Establishment code etc the job assigned to the particular department of Central Government Organization should be Universally Centralised?
8) And other related information."
The Deputy Director/CPIO IR(PL) section, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi vide letter dated 21.04.2023 replied as under:-
2. "In so far as the IR(PL) Section of this Ministry is concerned, the information may be treated as 'NIL'."
Page 2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.04.2023. The FAA vide order dated 08.05.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present Respondent: Babul lal Meena , Nitesh Bhasin , Anita Bisht, VK Shamma, Dhanajay , Amarjeet Singh, Sesei Lhungs , Sunil Kumar , Arshee Khosla Submission:
The CPIO appearing for the various department stated thatthe subject matter of the information sought by the applicant was outside the purview.
Decision:
Upon the perusal of the case records the Commissions finds that an appropriate reply has been given to the Appellant by the CPIO. Hence no action is required. Thus, the Appeal stands disposed off.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. द्विटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)