Upgradation of Pay – CAT Principle Bench Judgement

Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench

OA No.2230/2014

New Delhi, this the 11th day of October, 2018

Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
Hon’ble Ms. Aradhana Johri, Member (A)

ORDER (ORAL)

Justice L. Narasimha Reddy:-

This OA is filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to revise the pre-revised scale of pay of the applicants to the one Rs.7500 to 12000 instead of Rs.7450 to 11500 w.e.f. 01.01.2006. They seek further direction to upgrade the post held by them to the one of Accounts Officer/Audit Officer in the scale of Rs.5400 in PB-2 instead of Rs.4800/- and for further revision of pay scales.

2. The applicants contend that the 6th Central Pay Commission(CPC) recommended revision of pay scales e.f. 01.1.2006 for which pre-revised scales became the basis; and in their context, the pre revised scale itself was incorrect. According to them they were entitled to be put in the pre-revised scale of Rs.7500- 12000 but wrongfully they have been put in the pay scale of Rs.7400-11500. Reliance is placed upon an Order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the Patna Bench of this Tribunal in OA No.68/2014.

3. The respondents filed a counter affidavit stating that the relief as regards pre-revised scales, preceding the implementation of the 6th Pay Commission cannot be claimed at this stage and the Pay scale of the applicants has been fixed strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. The applicants filed a rejoinder also.

4. We heard Ms. Sumita Hazarika, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Geetanjali Mohan and Shri Shailendra Tiwary, learned counsel for the respondents.

5. The recommendations of the 6th CPC became enforceable w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The formula evolved by the 6th CPC is that the pay scale of an employee shall be revised by multiplying the basic pay of the employee as on 01.01.2006 with the factor 1.86. This in fact, is the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a batch of civil appeals. The plea of the applicant is that they have been wrongly placed in the pay scale of Rs.7450-Rs.11500/- instead of Rs.7500-Rs.12000.

6. The grievance is referable to the fixation of pay scales on the basis of 5th CPC recommendations. That in turn, became enforceable in the year 1996. The mistake, if at all, as regards fixation of pay scales has crept in the year 1996. There is nothing on record to disclose that the applicant has ever raised this contention either after the recommendations of the 5th CPC were implemented or before the Anomalies Committee constituted soon after the report of the 6th CPC.

7. At this length of time, the grievance even if genuine, cannot be redressed. The OA is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Aradhana Johri) 
Member(A)

(Justice L. Narasimha Reddy)
Chairman