Present : Ms.Ekta Thakur Advocate Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1153735
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-01-2014
AppellantPresent : Ms.Ekta Thakur Advocate
RespondentCentral Administrative Tribunal and Others
Excerpt:
cwp no.11382 of 2008 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh cwp no.11382 of 2008 date of decision :01.07.2014 g.s.oberoi .....petitioner versus central administrative tribunal and others .......respondents **** coram: hon'ble mr.justice sanjay kishan kaul, chief justice hon'ble mr.justice ajay tewari **** present : ms.ekta thakur, advocate for the petitioner. none for respondents no.2 to 5. respondent no.1 being proforma respondent. **** i. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. ii. to be referred to the reporters or not?. iii.whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. sanjay kishan kaul, chief justice (oral).the petitioner is aggrieved by the fixation of his pension post the fifth pay commission recommendations and the rejection of the challenge laid by him before the central administrative tribunal, chandigarh bench as per the impugned order dated 11.01.2008. the petitioner was deployed with the department of science and technology of the govt. of india/respondents and on his retirement on 31.03.1988 was holding the post of a director in the pre-revised functional nagpal sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp no.11382 of 2008 2 pay scale of rs.4500-5700. a cadre review was held soon thereafter in which the post of a director is stated to have been abolished and a new post of additional surveyor general was created. it is the case of the petitioner that the duties and responsibilities of a director were given to additional surveyor general and that the petitioner would have been promoted to the post of additional surveyor general from the civilian stream had he continued in service. the stand of the respondents was that the post of the additional surveyor general was newly created in the pay scale of rs.18,400-22,400/- on 12.08.1988 while the petitioner had already superannuated on 31.03.1988 and thus could not have been placed in that scale. the rationale of the impugned order is contained in para 9 to 12 as under:- “9. the petitioner retired from service before implementation of the 5th cpc and was not eligible for any benefit for corresponding revised pay scale as recommended by the 5th cpc. the pensioner is drawing pension as per last drawn pay by him at the time of his retirement. the revision of the pensioner's pay as per new pay scale in the higher pay scale is not tenable as the officer was not promoted to the higher post. in view of this the respondents have stated that the applicant is not eligible for any pay, arrears and pension of the post of additional surveyor general of india. they have, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the oa. 10. learned counsel for the parties have been heard. they have repeated all the arguments given in their pleadings. they made us to travers.through various documents. 11. we have examined the case carefully and perused the documents placed on record. we find that the applicant had nagpal sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp no.11382 of 2008 3 retired on 31.3.1988 afternoon while he was drawing the pay scale of rs.4500-5700. a cadre review was carried out and was implemented w.e.f.12.8.88. in the above cadre review, the post of director in the scale of rs.4500-5900 was abolished and a new post of additional surveyor general in the scale of rs.18400-22400 was created. the presumption of the applicant that he would have been promoted in the normal cours.to the higher post, cannot be accepted as the post of additional surveyor general was created after his retirement. it is seen from deptt. of science and technology letter dated 12.8.1988(r-1) under which the recommendation of the cadre review was implemented that nine posts of directors were created and place in the pay scale of rs.4500-150-5700. the same pay scale was drawn by the applicant dosing his service. 12. the replacement scale for the erstwhile scale of director i..e rs.4500-5700 as pleaded by the respondents and as per documents produced by learned counsel for the applicant is rs.14300-18300. as pleaded by the respondents, he is already drawing pension on the basis of the above replacement scale.”. we are in complete agreement with the aforesaid conclusion. unfortunate for the petitioner he had already retired by the time the cadre review took place. it is not permissible for the petitioner to plead that if he had continued in service he would have been promoted to the pay scale on the basis of which he seeks pension. no doubt the post of director was abolished and a new post of additional surveyor general was created but under the recommendations of the cadre review which were implemented, nine posts of directors were simultaneously created and and they were placed in the same pay scale as was enjoyed by the petitioner before his nagpal sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp no.11382 of 2008 4 superannuation. the replacement scale for the erstwhile scale of director i.e.rs.4500-5700 was rs.14,300-18,300 on the basis of which the petitioner has been granted pension which he continues to receive till today. we thus find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. the petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. ( sanjay kishan kaul ) chief justice ( ajay tewari ) judge july 01, 2014 sunita nagpal sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

CWP No.11382 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.11382 of 2008 Date of Decision :01.07.2014 G.S.Oberoi .....Petitioner Versus Central Administrative Tribunal and others .......Respondents **** CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI **** Present : Ms.Ekta Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner.

None for respondents No.2 to 5.

Respondent No.1 being proforma respondent.

**** i.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

ii.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?.

iii.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral).The petitioner is aggrieved by the fixation of his pension post the Fifth Pay Commission Recommendations and the rejection of the challenge laid by him before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench as per the impugned order dated 11.01.2008.

The petitioner was deployed with the department of Science and Technology of the Govt.

of India/respondents and on his retirement on 31.03.1988 was holding the post of a Director in the pre-revised functional Nagpal Sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.11382 of 2008 2 pay scale of Rs.4500-5700.

A cadre review was held soon thereafter in which the post of a Director is stated to have been abolished and a new post of Additional Surveyor General was created.

It is the case of the petitioner that the duties and responsibilities of a Director were given to Additional Surveyor General and that the petitioner would have been promoted to the post of Additional Surveyor General from the civilian stream had he continued in service.

The stand of the respondents was that the post of the Additional Surveyor General was newly created in the pay scale of Rs.18,400-22,400/- on 12.08.1988 while the petitioner had already superannuated on 31.03.1988 and thus could not have been placed in that scale.

The rationale of the impugned order is contained in para 9 to 12 as under:- “9.

The petitioner retired from service before implementation of the 5th CPC and was not eligible for any benefit for corresponding revised pay scale as recommended by the 5th CPC.

The pensioner is drawing pension as per last drawn pay by him at the time of his retirement.

The revision of the pensioner's pay as per new pay scale in the higher pay scale is not tenable as the officer was not promoted to the higher post.

In view of this the respondents have stated that the applicant is not eligible for any pay, arrears and pension of the post of Additional Surveyor General of India.

They have, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the OA.

10.

Learned counsel for the parties have been heard.

They have repeated all the arguments given in their pleadings.

They made us to traveRs.through various documents.

11.

We have examined the case carefully and perused the documents placed on record.

We find that the applicant had Nagpal Sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.11382 of 2008 3 retired on 31.3.1988 afternoon while he was drawing the pay scale of Rs.4500-5700.

A cadre review was carried out and was implemented w.e.f.12.8.88.

In the above cadre review, the post of Director in the scale of Rs.4500-5900 was abolished and a new post of Additional Surveyor General in the scale of Rs.18400-22400 was created.

The presumption of the applicant that he would have been promoted in the normal couRs.to the higher post, cannot be accepted as the post of Additional Surveyor General was created after his retirement.

It is seen from Deptt.

of Science and technology letter dated 12.8.1988(R-1) under which the recommendation of the Cadre Review was implemented that nine posts of Directors were created and place in the pay scale of Rs.4500-150-5700.

The same pay scale was drawn by the applicant dosing his service.

12.

The replacement scale for the erstwhile scale of Director i..e Rs.4500-5700 as pleaded by the respondents and as per documents produced by learned counsel for the applicant is Rs.14300-18300.

As pleaded by the respondents, he is already drawing pension on the basis of the above replacement scale.”

.

We are in complete agreement with the aforesaid conclusion.

Unfortunate for the petitioner he had already retired by the time the cadre review took place.

It is not permissible for the petitioner to plead that if he had continued in service he would have been promoted to the pay scale on the basis of which he seeks pension.

No doubt the post of Director was abolished and a new post of Additional Surveyor General was created but under the recommendations of the cadre review which were implemented, nine posts of Directors were simultaneously created and and they were placed in the same pay scale as was enjoyed by the petitioner before his Nagpal Sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.11382 of 2008 4 superannuation.

The replacement scale for the erstwhile scale of Director i.e.Rs.4500-5700 was Rs.14,300-18,300 on the basis of which the petitioner has been granted pension which he continues to receive till today.

We thus find no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

The petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE July 01, 2014 sunita Nagpal Sunita 2014.07.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document