Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Sub. Maj. R.S.Rana And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 23 September, 2008

N S Bhatia vs M/O Home Affairs on 17 February, 2020

While considering a similar matter, Honble High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 109/2010 (Dr. R.S. Rana & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.) on 20.05.2013 held that anomaly has arisen on account of the fact that the post of DEO 'D' is getting the same pay scale as that of STA despite the fact that DEO is a higher post. Consequently, they remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to adjudicate this issue of anomaly."
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Salam Singh vs Union Of India Through on 9 December, 2013

While considering a similar matter, Honble High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 109/2010 (Dr. R.S. Rana & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.) on 20.05.2013 held that anomaly has arisen on account of the fact that the post of DEO D is getting the same pay scale as that of STA despite the fact that DEO is a higher post. Consequently, they remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to adjudicate this issue of anomaly.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Abdul Majeed vs M/O Finance on 30 May, 2024

5. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that respondents denied the Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- to the applicants on promotion from Sr. Accounts Officer to the post of ACDA Group 'A' cadre of IDAS which is arbitrary, illegal and against the principle of natural justice as the same has already been paid by the respondents in pursuance to the judgment of CAT, Madras Bench judgment dated 26.04.2010 passed in OA No. 35/2009. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on the recommendation of 6th Central Pay Commission, MACP was granted to all the Central Government Civilian employees. According to MACP, Auditors, who have completed 30 years of their service, 3rd financial upgradation became eligible for enhanced rate of Grade Pay from Rs. 4800/- to Rs. 5400/- per month. Aggrieved against the above anomaly, Assistant Accounts Officer Group 'B' officers went to the CAT, Madras Bench vide OA No. 966/2009 S. Prabhu and others Vs. UOI and others and OA No. 967/2009 S. Ranga Rajan and others Vs. Union of India and others and CAT, Madras vide order dated 29.12.2010 found anomaly as has been claimed by the applicants in that OA and allowed the aforesaid OAs and granted the benefit of Rs. 5400/- to the Assistant Accounts Officer Group 'B' officers. Learned counsel for the applicants lastly submitted that all the applicants have been promoted from Senior AO MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA 7 Group 'B' gazetted post to Group A post of ACDA after 01.01.2006. The applicant before promotions from Senior AO were getting PB-3 scale of pay Rs. 15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- and after promotion from Senior AO Group 'B' to the post of ACDA Group 'A' have been given the same running grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in pay band -3 of Rs. 15600-39100, thus, they have not benefited monetary benefits after promotions from Senior AO Group 'B' to the post of ACDA Group 'A' posts. Thus, respondents have acted arbitrarily, illegally, without following the norms of 6th CPC recommendations.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

V N Singh vs Union Of India on 30 May, 2024

5. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that respondents denied the Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- to the applicants on promotion from Sr. Accounts Officer to the post of ACDA Group 'A' cadre of IDAS which is arbitrary, illegal and against the principle of natural justice as the same has already been paid by the respondents in pursuance to the judgment of CAT, Madras Bench judgment dated 26.04.2010 passed in OA No. 35/2009. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on the recommendation of 6th Central Pay Commission, MACP was granted to all the Central Government Civilian employees. According to MACP, Auditors, who have completed 30 years of their service, 3rd financial upgradation became eligible for enhanced rate of Grade Pay from Rs. 4800/- to Rs. 5400/- per month. Aggrieved against the above anomaly, Assistant Accounts Officer Group 'B' officers went to the CAT, Madras Bench vide OA No. 966/2009 S. Prabhu and others Vs. UOI and others and OA No. 967/2009 S. Ranga Rajan and others Vs. Union of India and others and CAT, Madras vide order dated 29.12.2010 found anomaly as has been claimed by the applicants in that OA and allowed the aforesaid OAs and granted the benefit of Rs. 5400/- to the Assistant Accounts Officer Group 'B' officers. Learned counsel for the applicants lastly submitted that all the applicants have been promoted from Senior AO MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA 7 Group 'B' gazetted post to Group A post of ACDA after 01.01.2006. The applicant before promotions from Senior AO were getting PB-3 scale of pay Rs. 15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- and after promotion from Senior AO Group 'B' to the post of ACDA Group 'A' have been given the same running grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in pay band -3 of Rs. 15600-39100, thus, they have not benefited monetary benefits after promotions from Senior AO Group 'B' to the post of ACDA Group 'A' posts. Thus, respondents have acted arbitrarily, illegally, without following the norms of 6th CPC recommendations.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1