Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. Annexure A7 is the letter dated 22.6.2010 which is impugned in this case. As per Annexure A7, the applicant was informed regarding the grant of non -functional Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 to certain categories of employees of ISRO/DOS on completion of four years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- It was further informed that the issue regarding pay fixation on grant of non-functional Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years in the grade of Rs. 4800/- has been examined in the department. Thus ultimately it was decided to grant non-functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- on completion of 4 years ie., on or after 1.1.2010. It was further stated that those persons will be granted one increment at the rate of 3% on the basic pay and to the figure so arrived at, the difference in Grade pay (Rs.5400-Rs.4800 = Rs. 600) should be added. The learned counsel for applicant would submit that grant of one increment at the rate of 3% of the basic pay was an idea trotted out by the respondents to pre-empt the applicant from getting the 3rd financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and claiming such relief and it was indeed a subtle device invented by the department especially when it was totally unsolicited by the applicant. If there was no clamour for fixation by grant of increment at the rate of 3%, there can be no difficulty to hold that this grant of one increment at the rate of 3 % of the basic pay was certainly an unsolicited act calculatedly done to deny the benefit which the applicant was otherwise entitled to get, it is further argued. The applicant contends that there was no occasion or necessity to grant additional increment while revising the pay from Rs.4800/- to 5400/- de hors the provisions of the Pay Commission Report and that the 6th CPC did not recommend such grant of additional increment and there was already a provision for financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme.

14. It is also contended by the applicant that though the applicant had requested the respondents in advance, that is, even before Annexure A7 about the consequent loss of career progression, the 2nd respondent sanctioned the increment without giving him any option. It is further contended that the increment so granted to the applicant has no backing or approval of the government. It was issued only to deny next promotion/financial upgradation. As per Annexure A5 OM dated 24.12.2009 issued by the respondents pertaining to revision of pay scale of employees of DOS/ISRO it was stated that the issue regarding assignment of Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- was examined in detail in the department and that taking all aspects into account they have decided to assign the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 to Personal Secretary and four other categories of officers mentioned therein who were assigned with the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- on completion of 4 years from the date of assigning the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- ie.,from 1.1.2006. It was further stated that those category of officers shall also be eligible for placement in PB 3 with a Grade pay of Rs. 5400/- on or after 1.1.2010 There shall be no fixation benefit while placing them in PB 3 with a GP of Rs. 5400/-. The applicant contends that it was consequent to Annexure.A6 order dated 1.2.2010 Personal Secretaries, on completion of 4 years from the date of assigning the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- were assigned with the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 w.e.f. 1.1.2010. Their pay was regulated as shown in Annexure A6.