Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
All India Association Of Statistical ... vs M/O Statistics on 15 December, 2023
1 OA No.40/2014 'CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.40 OF 2014 Dated this Friday,the 15"day af December, 2023 GORAN: MS. HARVINDER KAUR OBEROL MEMBER () MR. SHRI KRISHNA, MEMBER (A) All India Association of Statistical Investigators (Subordinate Statistical Service), C/o Office of National Sample Survey Organization, Through its President, Shri G.S.Palyal, Having its office at A-2 & 3 Wing, C.G.0. Complex, 4" Floor, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 674. Subhash S. Kulkarni, Statistical Investigator Grade |, O/o National Sample Survey Organization, (Field Operation Division} C.G.0. Complex, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 614, Mahesh A. Patil, Statistical Investigator Grade |, O/o National Sample Survey Organization, (Field Operation Division) C.G.0, Complex, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 644, Ainuddeen, Statistical Investigator.Grade-l, O/o National Sample Survey Organization, (Fisid Operation Division) C.G.0. Complex, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 614. Deepak Kumar Meshram, Statistical Investigator Grade |, O/o National Sample Survey Organization, (Field Operation Division) C.G.0. Complex, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 614. - Applicants (By Advocate Ms. Priyanka Mehndiratta) Versus _ The Union of India, through The Secretary, Ministry of Statistical & Programme Implementation, 2 OA No.40/2014 Sardar Patel Bhawan, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110 007. 2. The Secretary, Department of Expenditure and Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 110 004. 3. The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, North Block, New Delhi 110 001, -Respondents (By Advocate Smt. N.V.Masurkar) ORAL ORDER
Per: Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member {J} Applicants who are serving in the office of the respondents as Statistical Investigators Grade | (now known as Senior Statistical Officer) and Grade ll (Junior Statistical Officer) along with their Association of Statistical Investigators have filed this Original Application seeking the following reliefs -
"Sfa). fo allow the application.
8(b). fo hoid and declare that the Statistical investigators Gr. ff are entitled fo be paid the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- p.m. in PB. -2 wef 01.07 20068, at par with those of Assistants (CSS).
&{c). 'to further hold and declare that the Statistical Investigators Gri are entitled fo be paid Grade Pay of Rs.4800+ in P_B-2.
Bf cd). fo grant elf consequential benefits to the applicant.
&f{e}. fo award the cost of application."
2. On the recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission, the Subordinate Statistical service (SSS) was established in 2002, as-g Bes OA Ne.40/2014 feeder service to the Indian Statistical Service. The SSS was created by merging Statistical Functional Posts from 40 different Ministries and departments. The service was established with effect from 01.04.2002, consisting of Group B and Group C posts, with a four-tier structured cadre. Subsequently, four tier structure was reduced to two tier structure as per recommendation of VI CPC. Statistical investigator Grade | and Grade I] were merged as Grade | and Grade II] and Grade lV were merged as Grade Il with the following pay scales. The VI CPC vide lis report in para 7.41.5 page, recommended as such:
"7.47.8. A four grade structure exists in the Subordinate Statistical Service. Posts of Statistical Grade I, Grade IH and Grade [V are presently in the respective pay scales of Rs.6500-70500/, Rs5500-9000 and Rs.5000-80004 respectively. These posits shall come to lie in an identical pay scale on account of the restructuring of pay scales being recommended by the Commission. Accordingly, the post of Statistical investigator Grade Il may be placed in the next higher scale of Rs.7450-11500 corresponding to the revised pay band PB-2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with Grade Pay of Rs.4600Q and merged with the post of Statistical Investigator Grade | that already exists in the pay scale of Rs.7490-17800. Posts of Statistical investigator Grade ill and Grade 1V shall stand merged in the revised pay band PB-2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs.4200 corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-70500."
3. Gounsel for the applicant stated that In Chapter 3 of Vi CPC report, the CPC had also recommended establishing parity between the similarly placed personneli.e. Assistants and Section Officers, employed 4 DA No40/2014 in the Field offices such as SSS with those serving in the Central Secretariat. The Vi CPC report was accepted and implemented by the Government. On its implementation the applicants, fe. Statistical investigators Grade I! were Blaced in the Pay Band § of pay scale of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4,200/-. Similarly Statistical investigators Grade | were granted Pay Band H in Pay scale of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/-. Same pay scale was recommended for the Assistants and Section Officers of CSS also.
4. That the Government, vide Office Memorandum/Executive order dated 16.11.2009, granted the Assistants of the CSS (Central Secretariat Service), Armed Forces Headquarter Service and Indian Forest Service B and Railway Board Secretariat service, Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- instead of Rs.4,200/, According to the applicants, with this - decision, parity which was sought to be achieved by the VI CPC get disturbed,
5. The Association of Statistical investigators filed various representations. Vide OM dated 18.11.2010, it was informed that the matter of upgradation of the Grade Pay of the SSS Personnel was considered, but was not agree to. In one of the DO. letters, issued from the Ministry of Expenditure, it was stated that, in view of element of direct recruitment, as a method of recruitment of Assistants it was S OA No.40/2014 oe decided to grant higher grade pay in CSS. It Is pertinent to mention herein that recruitment in CSS and SSS is conducted through an All india Competitive Examination which is common to both cadres. Therefore, the oresent OA against grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- to Assistants in CSS and other Headquarter Service, ignoring Statistical Investigators-ll of the SSS. it was also stated in the DO letter that traditional parity of the Assistants of CSS with Inspectors of CBDT/CBEC is also required to be maintained and, therefore, the Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- has been granted. Keeping in view the functional aspect. The applicants have filed other representations and the same have been rejected on similar grounds.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this issue was again taken up by the Vil CPC, wherein again the Vil CPC had recommended parity between the Assistants In the Field Offices and those in Secretariat Offices. The VIl CPC had recommended Grade Pay of Rs.4,200/- for the Assistants of CSS also. However, the Government once again in its wisdom had granted the Grade Pay of Rs.4.600/- to the Assistants in Secretariat and other Headquarter Services. Hence this OA.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has vehemently opposed this Original Application on the ground of limitation.
& OA No.40/2014x it is stated that the Original Application has been filed in the year 2044 whereas the CPC report was accepted with effect from 01.01.2006.
Moreover, it was by OM dated 16.11.2009, that the Assistants of the representations were initially rejected on 18.11.2010 and the Original Application has been filed in the year 2014. Therefore, even if we go by Gate of rejection of representations as cause of action, there is a delay of more than three years in filing of the present Original Application. On merits, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this is a case where the Government in its wisdom has granted the higher Grade Pay to the Assistants of the CSS and other Headquarter Services due to functional requirements. This being a policy decision, the Tribunal shall not have the power to interfere with the same. She reiterated that there is a stark difference between the services rendered by the Statistical Investigators and the Assistants of the CSS. Not only there is an element of direct recruitment but there is a functional justification for maintaining a difference between the said posts. Further prayers in the OA are averred to be beyond the Scope of judicial review as per the settiad law.
8 Learned counsel for the applicant in rejoinder submits that the limitation will not come in a way as during pendency of this OA, the a OA No.40/2014 representations of the applicants were again considered and once again rejected by the orders dated 17.04.2014 and 14.02.2014 [Annexures A-ifa) & 1(b)). Applicants have incorporated challenge to these rejection orders, in the present GA, by way of amendment, therefore, bar of the limitation shall not come in way.ltis also the averment in the OA that the application is within the limitation period as per the AT Act. The counsel contended that the present case was one of continuing wrong. it was further submitted that element of direct recruitment existed in the case of Statistical investigators also. In fact, vide CGLE 2010, common recruitment/selection process was conducted for Assistants of CSS and investigators of SSS. Further, it was argued that candidates/aspirants for the Statistical posts were required to compete in a separate paper of 200 marks in statistics. Therefore, according to applicants once the mode of recruliment is same for the statistical Investigators and the Assistants of CSS, there is no reason as to why the Assistants of CSS be given a higher grade pay than the Assistants/Statistical investigators af SSS.
S$. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rameshchandra Agarwal reported in 2009 (8) SCC 35, held that "fhe Cadre structure and other terms and conditions of service in relation to Civil Servants are exclusive é 8 OA No.40/2014 domain of the employer but the same cannot be arbitrary and patently discriminatory. lt cannot also be opposite to the object sought to be achieved" . Further judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, LPA No.176, 2141 of 2005, Prem Chand Garg Vs. State of Punjab and others reported in 4 SCT 135 (P&H), was also relled upon to say that "tinkering with the recommendations either of the pay commission or of the senior officers Committee constituted for removal of anomaly would be whoily unwarranted because they are expert body and their recommendations are made after hearing all sides." Thus it was submitted that applicants be granted Grade Pay 4600/- at par with Assistants of CSS w.e.f 01.07.2006.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of | Federation of All India Customs and Central Excise Stenographers (Recognized) and others Vs. Union of india and others reported in (1983) 3 SCC 91, wherein it was held that "the differentiation has been sought fo be justified in view of the nature and the types of the work done, that is, on intelligible basis. The same amount of physical work may entail different quality of work, some more sensitive, some requiring more tact, some jess--it varies from nature and culture of employment The problem about equal pay cannot always be translated inio a 5 OA No 40/2014 mathematical formula. If it has a rational nexus with the object to be sought for, as reiterated before a certain amount of value judgment of ihe administrative authorities who are charged with fixing the pay scale has fo Oe fef with them and if cannot be inferfered with py the Court unless it is demonstrated that either it is irational or based on no basis or arrived mala fide either in law or infact".
41. We have heard both the learned counsels for the parties and perused the pleadings and documents available on record.
42. in the matter of claims for pay parity, Apex Court has laid down the basic law on the subject in Union of India & Anr Vs. PV. Hariharan & Anr, (1997 (2) SLR 233}, the Hon'ble Apex Court had observed:
"Fixation of pay scales is the function of the Govt. which normaily acts on the recommendation of a Pay Commission. _ Besides, it is important to recognize that change of pay scale -- _ of a category has a cascading effect."
43. This well established, principle of law was reiterated in Sate of Bihar & Ors Vs. Bihar Veterinary Association & Ors, [(2008) 2 SCC (L&S) 111]. In this case a mechanical application of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' was not favoured; besides the adverse consequences by way of the possible cascading effects and multiple litigations were also taken note by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
10 DA No.40/201414. In Union of India & Anr Vs. 8. Thakur, {(2008) 1 SCC (L&S) 329} even the limited scope of judicial review in such matters was delineated aS only in cases where the impugned decision was found fo be "unreasonable, unjust and prejudicial to a section of the employees",
15. Matters of pay revision/parity cannot be claimed automatically only on the basis of previous equal pay, but by establishing that the persons claiming post revision parity were discharging identical or similar duties to those of the reference category. Juxtaposing the above principles of law with the factual gamut of the present case: admittedly the claims for pay parity are against different employers. Central Secretariat Service is an altogether different cadre and historically they have enioyed higher pay scale than similar personnel in other departments. Moreover pay .
revisions on the basis of the recommendations of the Central Pay Commission are not automatically mutatis mutandis extendable to ifs employees. On the other hand, the pre-requisite is a conscious decision on the part of the competent authorities as per the rules and the facts. The claims in the OA about the Statistical Investigators and Assistants in CSS being comparable have been unequivocally rebutted by the respondents.
shiehieeitteeetanay DE ya GATE Gl tilaa ial Li tin tlt inti ntti LL Qo Qa EN i GA No.40/2014
46. The Principal Bench of this Tribunal in Shri Rabinara Nath Basu Vs. Union OF India, OA No.2102/2010 with MA No.1678/2010, OA No.2114/2010 with MA No.1686/2010, had the occasion to deal with "In view of the above legal setting on pay parity and equal pay for equal work, it is noted that 6th CPC has already considered the issue raised by the Applicants and the 6th. Central Pay Commission has recommended two distinct and exclusive pay scales and grade pay in Paragraphs 3.1.9 and 3.1.14 which read as follows:-
°34.9 Accordingly, the Commission recommends upgradation of the entry scale of Section Officers in ail Secretariat Services(including CSS as well as non participating ministries/departments/organizations) to Rs. 7500-12000 corresponding to the revised pay band PB 2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs 4800. Further. on par with the dispensation already available in CSS, the Section Officers in other . Secretariat 161 Offices, which have always had an established parity with CSS/CSSS, shall be extended | the scale of Rs.8000-73500 in Group-B corresponding fo the revised pay band PB 2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs.4800 on campietion of four years service in the lower grade. This will ensure full parity between all Secretariat Offices. It is clanfied that the pay band PB 2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs.4800 is being recommended for the post of Section Officer in these services solely fo mainiain the existing relativities which were disturbed when the scale was extended only to the Section Officers in CSS. The grade carrying grade pay of Rs.4800 in pay band PB-2 is, otherwise, not to be treated as a regular grade and should not be extended fo any other category of employees. These recommendations shall apply mutatis-mutandis to post of Private Secretary/equivaient ie OA No.40/2014 in these services as well. The structure of posts in Secretariat Offices would now be as under:-
Past Pre revised pay scale Corresponding revised pay band and grade pay LDC Rs.3050-4590 PB-1 of Rs.4860-20200 along with grade pay of Rs.1900 UDC Rs. 4000-6000 PB-1 of Rs.4860-20200 along with grade pay of Rs.2400 Assistant Rs.6500-710800 PB-2 of Rs. 8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs.4200 Section Officer Rs.7500-12000 Rs.8000-13500* {on completion of four years) PB-2 of Rs.87Q0-34800 along with grade pay of Rs. 4800.
PB-2 of Rs.8700-34800 along with grade pay of Rs 5400° (on completion of four years) Under Secretary Rs. 10000-15200 PB-3 of Rs.15600-39100 along with grade pay of Rs.6100 Deputy Secretary Rs.12000- 16500 PB-3 of Rs. 18600-39100 along with grade pay of Rs.6600 Director Rs.14300-18300 PB-3 of Rs. 15600- 39100 along with grade pay of Rs. 7600 'This scale shall be available only in such of those organizations/services which have had a_ historical parity with CSS/CSSS. services like AFHOQSS/AFHQSSS/RBSS and Ministerial/Secretarial posts in Ministries/Departments organisations like MEA, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, CVC, UPSC, ete. would therefore be covered.
ee tae to 3.4.14 In accordance with the principle established in the earlier paragraphs, parity between Field and Secretariat Offices is recommended. This will involve merger of few grades. in the Stenographers cadre, the posts of Stenographers Grade If and Grade / in the existing scales of Rs.4500-7000/Rs, 5000-8000 andRs. 5500-9000 will, fherefore, stand merged and be placed in the higher pay scale of Rs.6500-70500. in the case of ministerial post in non- Secretariat Offices, the posts of Head Clerks, Assistants, Office Superintendent and Administrative Officers Grade Ill in the respective 43 OA No 40/2014 pay scales of Rs 5000-8000, Rs.5600-8000 and Rs. 6500- 10500 will stand merged."
8 was ultimately held as under-
$ »t¢ is trite law that even if ihe persons doing fhe same work having the same nomenciature like PSs, ASOs and Stenographers, tne pay parity need not be admissible qualificatio as their _ recrullment, educational n, experience, promotion prospecis, responsibilities, reliability and confidentiality matters which they may be handling would be different from other groups. These are sufficient reasons to maintain pay disparily between two groups even with same designation, in the present case, we find that the pay disparity which was existing during 5th CPC period has heen continued in the 6th CPC. Thus, we do not find any ground to claim historical parity. Therefore, we do not find any legal infirmity in the orders passed by the Respondents on 03.08. 2009."
47, Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and guided byt is bereft of merit. in he well settled position In law, in our opinion the OA view of the above, the OA stands dismissed. No costs...
(Shri Krishriay (Harvinider Kaur Oberol) Member (A) Member (J) km"