Judgment:
HON'BLE MRS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATAIVE MEMBER
The applicants are challenging denial of revised scale of Rs. 5000-8000 consequent upon 5th CPC recommendations on par with similarly situated persons.
2. According to the applicants, they entered the service of the Fisheries Survey of India at Cochin, as Marine Electrician and Refrigeration Mechanic respectively in the year 1994 in the scale of Rs. 1400-2300 and still continue in the same posts. According to them they are Diploma holders in Electrical Engineering/Refrigeration Mechanic. The 5th CPC in paragraph 50.22 and 50.24 specifically recommended that the entry posts where degree or diploma is prescribed as essential minimum qualification were sought to be rationalised. Technicians and Processing Assistants requiring Graduation as minimum qualification should have been placed in the scale of Rs. 1600-2660 the replacement scale of which is Rs. 5000-8000. Despite the above, the second respondent while implementing the pay revision granted replacement pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 instead of Rs. 5000-8000. Hence, they filed this O.A. mainly for grant of the higher scale of Rs. 5000-8000 and for grant of financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme. The main grounds raised by the applicants are that (a) all posts like Processing Assistants, Supervisor Civil and Mechanical and host of others in the FSI, IFP and CIFNET which carried the pre-revised scale of Rs. 1400-2300 were granted the replacement scale of Rs. 5000-8000, the Vth CPC recommended the scale of Rs. 5000-8000 to the posts where the essential qualification is Degree or Diploma, the Government accepted the same and in similar cases the Tribunal granted the higher scale.
3. The respondents have filed reply statement. They submitted that the FSI has a fishing fleet of 13 vessels for conducting fishery resources survey. The departmental Workshops have been set up to carry out the routine nature of maintenance repairs on board the vessels attached to each base. In implementation of the recommendations of the 5th CPC therefore, the said pay scales of Rs. 1400-2300 was revised to Rs. 4500-7000 as indicated in CCS (RP) Rules, 1997. This was the normal replacement scale because the two posts of Marine Electrician and Refrigeration Mechanic were not included either in part-B or in part C of the 1st schedule Annexed to CCS (RP) Rules, 1997. They contended that the Vth CPC did not recommend any higher pay scale for the workshop posts in the FSI. They further stated that as per the Recruitment Rules, Diploma is not an essential qualification for appointment to the post of Marine Electrician and Refrigeration Mechanic. As per the skill categorisation and job content, the posts of Marine Electrician and Refrigeration Mechanic are workmen classified as Master Craftsmen. The job content of the applicants do not demand the work of a Technical Supervisor nor a Junior Engineer.
4. The applicants have filed rejoinder reiterating the averments in the O.A.
5. The respondents have filed additional reply statement in which they submitted that the revised pay scales were notified on 30.9.1997 whereas this Application was filed only on 18.11.2008. As regards grant of ACP they submitted that the first applicant was granted first financial upgradation under ACP scheme w.e.f. 29.12.2006 and the second applicant w.e.f. 4.7.2007.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings.
7. The issue which has come up for consideration is whether the applicants are entitled to the scale of Rs. 5000-8000 consequent upon 5th CPC recommendations. There is no whisper about the delay in filing the Application. As contended by the respondents in the additional reply statement, the Vth CPC Recommendations were implemented way back by notification dated 30.9.1997 whereas this Application is filed only on 18.11.2008. Prima facie we find that the Application is hit by Limitation Act.
8. On merits, first of all let us examine the recommendation of the Vth CPC referred to by the applicants. Paragraph 50.23 and 50.24 are extracted below:
"We have carefully considered the demands of the federation and the views of the administrative Ministries/Departments in the light of our general approach on the pay scales of different professional/technical groups of staff and existing relativities between technical and non-technical categories. We have, as a general rule, decided to improve the initial recruitment pay scale of Diploma engineers in government. We accordingly, recommend following pay structure for engineering subordinate cadres: Existing Proposed (in present terms) 1400-2300 1600-2660 50.24 These pay scales will apply mutatis mutandis for diploma engineers in different cadres depending upon the availability of specific existing pay scales. We have also recommended specific pay structure for different engineering cadres.
It is true that the Vth CPC in order to improve the initial recruitment pay scale of Diploma holders, recommended higher scale to them. Therefore, there is no dispute that the Vth CPC has recommended higher scale to Diploma Engineers in Government service. The Recruitment Rules of the respective posts are produced in Annexure A1. The relevant portion is extracted below:
Marine Electrician
Essential Qualifications
1. Diploma in Electrical Engineering
2. 3 years experience in Electrical repairs in Shipyards, Ports, Fisheries Institutes, Dredging Corporation etc.
OR
1. S.S.C.
2. ITI/NCTVI certificate in Electrical Trade
3. 5 years experience in Electrical repairs in Shipyards, Ports, Fisheries Institutes, Dredging Corporation, etc.
Refrigeration Mechanic
Essential
1. Diploma in Air Conditioning
2. 3 years experience as Refrigeration Mechanic in a reputed firm, etc.
OR
1. ITI/NCVT Certificate in Air conditioning and Refrigeration
2. 5 years experience as a Refrigeration Mechanic in a reputed firm
From the above it is very clear that Diploma is not the minimum Essential qualification prescribed for the posts held by the applicants, ITI with 5 years experience is the alternative minimum qualification required. It is true that the applicants possess the Diploma qualification but an ITI with 5 years experience is also eligible to be recruited to the post. If the applicants' argument that a Diploma holder is entitled to higher scale is accepted, the same scale has to be granted to an ITI holder also who is eligible to be appointed to the post. Two scales cannot be granted to a post depending on the qualification of the incumbent - higher scale to Diploma holder and ordinary scale to ITI holder. The scale of pay is attached to the post and not to the incumbent depending on his qualification. That is, if a Degree/Diploma / ITI holder is appointed to the post, they would be eligible for the scale of pay of the post and not for different pay scale depending on their qualification. In this view of the matter, the contention of the applicant that as Diploma holder he is entitled to be granted a higher pay scale cannot be accepted.
9. The applicants have relied on the order of this Tribunal in O.A. 881/04. In that case, the applicant was initially appointed as Supervisor (Civil) in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2300. The case of the applicant was that the revised higher scale was granted to Processing Assistants, Marketing Assistants, Scientific Assistants, Head Clerks etc who had also like him been given the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000. The post of Supervisor (Civil) are promotion posts and the Diploma in Civil Engineering was an essential qualification for promotion to those posts. Hence, the Tribunal declared that the applicant was entitled to get the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and he shall also be entitled to the consequential benefits of arrears on account of difference in pay. The posts like Processing Assistants, etc .are also Supervisory/Degree posts. In the case on hand, the applicant is not appointed to a supervisory post or to a post the minimum qualification of which for original recruitment is Diploma in Engineering. Hence, we are of the view that the case of the applicants is not similar to the case relied on by them.
10. In this view of the matter the OA fails, it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.