Skip to content


K. Kandappan Vs. Union of India Rep by Its Secretary to Government, Department of Education and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided On
Case NumberORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.81 OF 2010
Judge
AppellantK. Kandappan
RespondentUnion of India Rep by Its Secretary to Government, Department of Education and Others
Advocates:For the Applicant: M/s Sai, Bharath and Ilan, Advocate. For the Respondents : R. Syed Mustafa, Advocate.
Excerpt:
.....india in the letter cited above has treated the applicant differently and granted acp at the lower scale. learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that in other departments like pwd and electricity of the government of puducherry, similarly placed persons like that of the applicant have been granted acp in the pay scale of rs.4000-6000 whereas in the education department alone, the applicant has been treated differently and granted acp in the pay scale of rs.3200-4590. in that view of the matter, learned counsel prayed that the relief sought for by the applicant has to be granted and the oa to be allowed. 3. on notice, the respondents have entered appearance and filed a reply statement. learned counsel for the respondents contended that the applicant who is working in the.....
Judgment:

Hon'ble Mr. R. Satapathy, Administrative Member

The OA is filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:

“to call for the records on the file of the second respondent relating to the impugned order bearing ref:No.60187/CS(Edn-I)E7/08 dated 19.8.2008 and quash the same in as much as it grants the scale of Rs.3,200-4,900 as ACP benefit to the applicant and consequently direct the respondents to grant the scale of rs.4,000-6,000 with effect from 9.8.1999 on first financial upgradation under ACPS, with all consequential and monetary benefits and interest on the belated payment and to award costs.”

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been appointed as Mechanic (Plumber/Electrician) under the 5th respondent’s College on 5.1.1987 in the pay scale of Rs.950-1400 which was revised to Rs.3050-4590 from 1.1.1996 as per the Fifth Pay Commission's recommendations. It is further stated by the learned counsel that the applicant was placed in the scale of Rs.3200-4590 with effect from 9.8.1999 under the ACP Scheme of 1999 by the order dated 19.8.2008(Annexure A.22). Whereas it is his contention that the applicant ought to have been granted to the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 as per the Government of India instructions dated 10.2.2000(Annexure A.25). However, the respondents without applying the clarification issued by the Government of India in the letter cited above has treated the applicant differently and granted ACP at the lower scale. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that in other Departments like PWD and Electricity of the Government of Puducherry, similarly placed persons like that of the applicant have been granted ACP in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 whereas in the Education Department alone, the applicant has been treated differently and granted ACP in the pay scale of Rs.3200-4590. In that view of the matter, learned counsel prayed that the relief sought for by the applicant has to be granted and the OA to be allowed.

3. On notice, the respondents have entered appearance and filed a reply statement. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that the applicant who is working in the Education Department cannot compare himself with the other Departments like PWD and Electricity Departments. The applicant has been granted the ACP in the pay scale of Rs.3200-4900 as per the rules and there is no illegality in the impugned order dated 19.8.2008(Annexure A.22). Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the Government of India letter dated 9.8.1999 which is marked as Annexure A.24). In Annexure II of the said letter the next higher (Standard/common) Pay scales under the financial upgradation for the isolated posts have been given. The applicant who is in S-5 Scale (Rs.3050-4590) has been granted the next higher scale of Rs.3200-4900 in S-6 under the ACP Scheme. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the respondents states that the applicant who is in S-5 scale is not eligible to get the Pay Scale in S-7 which he is seeking. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the application.

4. We have considered the arguments put forth by the learned counsel on both sides and gone through the pleadings and the records furnished by the respective sides.

5. It is not in dispute that the applicant is holding the post of Mechanic which is in isolated post in the Education Department under the respondents. When the ACP Scheme was introduced by the Government in 1999 as per the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission, various clarification have been issued subsequently about the implementation of the said Scheme. Annexure A.25 is one such which applies to the case of isolated post. The clarification reads as follows:

S.No.

Point of doubt

Clarification

1-9

Xxx

Xxx

10.

For isolated posts, the scale of pay for ACPS as recommended by the Pay Commission may be implemented and not the standard/common pay-scales indicate vide Annexure -II of the Office Memorandum dated August 9, 1999

For isolated posts, the scale of pay for ACPS shall be the same as those applicable for similar posts in the same Ministry/Department/Cadre except where the Pay Commission has recommended specific pay scales for mobility under ACPS. Such specific cases may be examined by respective Ministers/Departments in consultation with the Department of Personnel and Training. In the case of remaining isolated posts, the pay scales contained in Annexure-II of the Office Memorandum dated August 9,1999(ACPS) shall apply.11-32

Xxx

xxx

It is thus very clearly seen that for isolated posts where there is no promotional avenues in the hierarachy, the pay scales of similar posts in the same Ministry/Department/Cadre, may be considered for the purpose of deciding the ACP. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that the respondents have granted the scale of Rs.4000-6000 to the Mechanic working in the PWD and other Departments. On perusal of the Recruitment Rules, we find that the applicant has also been working as Group 'D'(Annexure A-1) and for similar posts in the PWD Department, the scale of Rs.4000-6000 ( the replacement scale of Rs.1200-2040) has been prescribed in the next higher cadre of Senior Mechanic. However, in the Education Department where the applicant is working as Mechanic is an isloated post and there is no hierarachy in the cadre. Hence it is logical that next higher pay scale which is available for the same category of people, in the PWD should be followed by the Education Department where the applicant is working. We have also gone through the reply statement very carefully and we do not find that there is any specific answer as to why the scale of Rs.4000-6000 cannot be granted to the applicant. It is not the question of anomoly or violation of any procedure. However, the scheme should be implemented as per the guidelines issued by the Government of India and the provisions contained in letter dated 10.2.2000.

6. For the above reasons, we are of the opinion that the applicant has succeeded in getting the relief sought for by him. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 19.8.2009 so far as it relates to the applicant. Placing reliance on the clarification issued by the Government of India in letter No.35034/1/97-Estt(D)(Vol.IV) dated 10.2.2000(Annexure A.25), we direct the respondents to grant the first ACP to the applicant in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 from 9.8.1999 and pass appropriate orders within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The OA is allowed accordingly. No order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //