i

ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL CENTRAL MADRASBENCH Two the Wednesday, Twenty NinthCayot December, Ten Thousand PRESENT JUDICIAL MEMBER THE HON'BLEMR. K. ELANGO, AND THE HON'BLE MR. R. SATAPATHY,ADMINISTRATIVE' MEUBER ORIGINAL APPLICATIONNos.966 AND 967 OF 2OO9 O.A.966of 2009 1. S. Prabhu-Il, 2.K.Sankaranarayanan, r 3 . A .M u n e e A h m e d 4.S.Rangarajan-III, l 5.V.S.ayaraman 6 . S .C h a n d r a m o u l i 7 . G .R a j a n N 8 . S a r a s w a t h ia r y a n a n K. Jayasree 9. 1 0 . TL . S h a r a d a . 1 1 .S . M a n i c k a m 12.R.Shanthi-Ill T 13.G. hilakavathY Kannan 14.Geetha 15.S.Rajasekar 16.M.Vairamuthu -- All are workingas AssistantAccountsOfficer(A&E), S , 3 6 1 - A n n a a l a iT e Y n a m P e l , Chennai.

nts .. Applica

vs.
l . U n i o no f I n d i a rep by Secretaryto ment, ' Govern of Ministry Personnel, & Grievances Pension Public & (Deptt. of Personnel Training), North Block,New Delhi. & 2.TheComptroller Auditor of General India, Marg, 9, Pocket Deen DaYalUPadhYaY N e wD e l h i .

^. 3.The DeputyAcccur'3-: General(Ad? ), Nadu, l(A&E),Ta!"nil O/o The Accoun'i'iGe:rera , 3 6 1 , A n n aS a l a i T e v r a n p e t ,C h e n n a i . R o 4. Hemalatha ajag la a^ 5 .G . R a m a n a t h a n t''l 6. ShabbirHassan ota 7,S, Sundaram-I 8. K.S.Sukumar n Srinivasa 9. Vijayalakshmi 10.C.Chitra 1 1 . G .S a K h i v e l 12.K.R.Prakash 13.P.Balanethran 14.R.Janarthanan Parvathy 15.P.K. Savithri-I 16.R. 1 7 . P . N B h a v a nS a n k a r , i 18.O.Sulochana 1 9 . S . KP r e m k u m a r . 20.S. Jagadeesan 2 1 .L a l i t h a i v a k u m a r S 22.E.Ramu 23.loy Louis Sathyanarayanan 24.Gomathi kumar Jaya Rajeswari 25.S. Varadarajan 26.Mythili 2 7 .B .R . S e e t h a l a k s h m i 2 8 . R .M a l a - I 29,P.Kanagavalli lesuraia 30.S.Daniel 3l.M.Thangaraj 32.M.Sathiavani 3 3 . N .K a l i a m m a l VUayaraghavan 34.Jayanthi ReginaRaj 35.Josephine 36.S.H.Subbulakshmi 37.S.VenkataRao 38.R.Srikantan-II 39.V. Radha 40.4T.5. Hariharan 4l.Indirani KrishnamurthY Chandran 42.S.Satish 43.A. Vidyasagar 44.N.Parasurm-III 45.RamaPrakash 46.8. PrabhavathY Nair Madhavan 4T,Pankajam Viswanathan 4S.Rajeswari M 49.J.K. ahendiran R 50.Revathi aishankar 5l.PramilaChidambaram

I
I

-352.N. Narasimhan-il 5 3 , S ,N a g n r a ; a n - t t t JaYararttan 54.Rukmanl 55.R.Sangilimuthu Varadharalan 56.Malini Kannan. 57.Mridula Murall 5B.Vasantha 5g.Ezhilarasi 6 0 . P .M u n i a m m a l . Devt 61.T.Padmini 62.1.lnbarajan 63.D. Prabhakaran 64.V'Raia 65.1.layalaksnmr. Ravindran 56.Sushila 67.S. Prasad 1??_ ^- c6nior Acco.-^..-ants -All are workingas >e

Chennai'

(A&E)' I'i.ioi."""urit General reYnamoet' Respondents ;i;;,';;;; salai' ..

' Sr' Couns?l tor Mr. Muthukumarasamy llrCounset tne lenasenan M/s applicants
Mr. T.Ravikumar Mr. S. Sadasharam

&3 for .. Counsel R'2

?t^ili:*#ii:,
58,61&65 .. Counselfor R'56

M/s Paul& Paul M/s P, Rajendran

:tfiiiir-*,'
3s,qt,+z,qt's! {) I' :5 o / !' E
b 57,59,60,63'b

0.A'967 of 2009 1.S.Rangarajan-Ill, Ahmeo ?.A.Muneer nan g.f . Sa nkaranaraYa 4.S.Prabhu 5.M.Sudhakaran 6.R.Viswanathan Gaiendran 7.V. . B.K.Balachanoar 9.T.K.Ganesan Devi 10.5.Uma 11.N.Shajahan

12.K. umaresan K 13.K. Vetrivel prakash 14.C,Babu 15.A.Prabhu 16.K.Sanka rasubra nian ma 17.S. emalakshml H 18.C.K, Damodaran 19.Saroja Kalyanasundaram 20.D.Shyamata 21.S.Chella 22.Lakshmi Moni 23.P.Revathl 24.J.Chtthra 25.N.C. VaiJayanthlmala 26.8. Revathl 27.S,Mohana 28.N.Thilagam 29.K.Ramadoss 30.S,Baktavatchalam 31.S.Ramgopal 32.C.Mukundan 33.P. Gvolndasamy 34.S, anoharan M
J 5, K.5rtram

36.S.Klrubantthi --AIlare worklng as Asslstant Accounts Officer O/o Accountant General(A&E), 361-Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai. .. Applica nts Vs. l.Unionof India re.p Secretary Government, to -by Ministry personnel, public of Grievances pension, & (Depttof Personnel Training), & NorthBlock,NewDelhi. 2.The Comptroller Auditor eneral & G of India, 'Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg, NewDelhi. 3.The Accountant General(A&E), 3 6 1 ,A n n aS a l a l , Teynampet, TamilNadu, Chennai. 4.S. Ravishankar 5.S.Muralidharan-I
I

-)'

6.Smt.P. Gomathl-l 7.Smt' LathaSundar 8.D.MohanraJ 9.S.KuPpuswamy r 0 . M . RM a d h u b a l a n . Sivakumar Ranjanl 11.Smt. P. 12.Smt. Ramamanl V' Revathl-Iv 13.Smt. Clement i+.smt. Annammal Raghunathan 15.Mohana Byravan 16.Kanthi 17.GUma , Kannan lS.Sumathra Jagadeeswaran 19.Smt.Geetha Suresh Maheswari io.smt. A.S.Geethakumary 21.Smt, M.VUaYalakshmi 22.Smt. A. 23.Smt. Marakathavatli Rajamanl 24.ShrilSmt.A. 2 5 .M . D u r a i P a n d i a n 26.P.Pandian as ---Allareworking Sectlon hoc) OfFrcer(Ad now.MO (Reaular TemPorary), blo-a..ou ntunt General(A&E)' TeYnamPet' 361,AnnaSalal, , ResPondents Chennal' M/sA. lenasenan Mr.T' Ravikumar M/s Row& ReddY M/s Paul& Paul M/s S. Sadasharam

for Counsel the apPllcants for Counsel R'2& 3 for , Counsel 5,8-11,13' 23-26 for .. Counsel R'18 for R.7 .. Counsel '22 ' L2, L9 t5-17,

-o-

ORDER Member) l'-dic;al Mr' by (Pronounced The Hon'ble K' Elango' is Sincethe reliefsoughtfor in t:ese applications facts' both these common whlch is founded on slmilar of were heardtogetherand are beingdisposed applications oroer' by this common 2, the above The brief facts leadingto the filing of are The appllcants are appllcatlons as set out hereunder' and holdlng in employed the officeof the third respondent (herelnafter the Dost of Asslstant Accounts Officers into the service entered referredas AAO). The applicants post' After as Clerks, which is the lowest entry level they cameto be promoted havingservedin that capaclty The next and as Accountants later on as Sr' Accountants' Otflcer wasthe postof Sectlon hlgherpost in the hierarchy were madefrom the persons (S.O.)to whichpromotlons who have passed Section Officer Grade Examinations (SOGE)I' The appllcanB hacl lherelnafter referred as as cameto be promoted S'O' and thereafter passed SOGE arose' as post on their batchseniority and whenvacancles were not The candidateswho dld not possessSOGE to . entitledfor promotton the postsof S'O' and the higher based posts and they could reachthe post of Supervisor of Sr' on their seniorltyon promotionfrom the category post of S'O' ls Accountant. The next higher post to the 'MO'which carries hlgherscaleof paywhichformedpart ,
L-/

-7ttE status. AJI :i,efitsan6 promobons of Group'B'gazette{t to the posts of 'MOs' and lS-Cs' are governed by Rulesand the apptkS-= ,';erepromotedto the Recruitment wlth the ab: ' e Rules. saldpostsin conformlty 3. Whileso, in the year 1999 a schemeknown as

'AssuredCareer Progression' sceme was introducedby pursuac: the recommendation to the centralGovernment The saidschemeis evolvedto of the V Pay Commission. deal with the problem of siagnation faced by the promotional avenues' due employees to lack of adequate two financialupgradations The scheme contemplated of one on completion 12 years and another one on from the date of service of completion 24 yearsof regular only if no is entry. Suchfinancialupgradation prescribed duringthe periodof 12 and 24 years regularpromotion The by havebeenavailed the personnel. grantof financial upgradationis subjectto the fulfilment of the normal in promotion norms. Till 2009therewas no problem the during of implementation the abovescheme.However, a of 2009,the Government Indiahas introduced Modified which is known a5 Scheme, AssuredCareerProgression Pay of MACPS per the recommendation the VI Central as w.e.f. 01.09.2008' As Commission per the said

of three financial upgradationson completion scheme, 10, 20 and 30 Years of service were

a whenever person It 1 contemplated. is applicable L-

-8<'-r;:e ^ ir'le same completes10 years of continuous has upgradation to b Ccnestrictlyin grade. The financial in pay as provided of with accordance the hierarchy grade Pay Rules2008. Whileimplementlng Revlsed the C.C.S. a recommendations,new the VI CentralPayCommission's which conceptof grade pay and PayBandwas introduced provlded grade pay to the post of Sr' Accountantas in and Rs.42OOl- the sald post was included the PayBand and the the 2. Whlleimplementing saldscheme, second have re-flxed the grade pay of party third respondents at at respondents Rs.5400/- PayBand2. The actlonof the in resoondents not conferringthe benefltsof the said and illegal is In scheme favourof the applicants arbitrary posts are holdingsupervisory the appllcants eventhough and are functional AAOs supervislng the party

respondents.The abovepay fixationcame to be passed offlce orderdt.03'08'2009 by virtue of the lmpugned the appllcatlons issuedby the third respondent.Hence, are filed seeking to quash the sald order and for rellefas statedthereln. consequential 2 The official respondents and 3 have filed reply scheme that underMACP wherelnlt is contended affidavits ' and basedon the recommendations the VI CentralPay of were granted the the private respondents Commission, 4. are not grade pay of Rs.5400/- Slncethe appllcants they were granted the ellglblefor the benefltsof MACP to pay of Rs'4200/-applicable their pay band' The \grade

>.'

-9applicantswere not eligibleto tr'e benefitsof the above

/

schemefor the reasonsthat thev are servingas Assistant by AccountsOfficersin the omce of :ne third respondent of course promotion the the attaining saldpostduring normal and seniority. Slnce the benefit of the scheme to be seryice, of extended completlon 10 yearsof continuous on by asAccountants who are appointed those Sr. Accountants upgraclation for are direct recruitment eligible threefinancial under MACP only after fulfltmentof the norms prescrlbed shallbe purelypersonal upgradatlon Scheme.The financlal to to the employeesand has no relevance the seniority in were stagnating position. Sincethe private respondents the lower post, the scheme was introduced on the and hence, of recommendation the VI Pay Commission extendingthe benefitto them cannotbe held to be illegal prayedfor the dismissal the applications. of and accordingly The private respondentshave also filed reply affidavits by as raislng similar contentions contended the official of and respondents prayedForthe dlsmissal the applications'

5.

Sr' We have heard Mr' R. Muthukumarasamy,

and Mr, T. Ravikumar,learned Counselfor the applicants counsel for R.2 and 3 , Mr. N.G'R. Prasad, Mr'

M/s S.Sadasharam, Paul & Pauland Mr. P' Rajendran,the and for learnedcounselappearing the private respondents on available recorcl' the relevantmaterials lperused
U---

-1 0 6. Fromthe records, is seenthat:heapplicants it who

wereinitially appointed clerks as andhaving beenqualified in the departmental examinations various at stageshave been promotedto the post of Accountants and Section Officers.Subsequently, applicants the were promotedas Sr. Accountants Assistant and Accounts Officers basedon the seniority and all the applicants holding postof are the MOs. The above facts are admittedby the official

respondents their reply, In the replyit is alsoadmitted in that the private respondents have not acauiredthe qualifyingexaminations promotion SectionOfficers for as and accordingly they were stagnated the levelof Sr. at Accountants,Whenthe facts are likethis, it appears that on introduction MACP of Scheme whileimplementing the recommendation of the VI pay Commission,s

recom mendations,three financial upgradations were extendedto the private respondents.According the to respondents, they are rightlygranted the third financial upgradation the gradepay of Rs.5400/- givento and was them based the eligibility on criteria the abovescheme. of We are not in agreement that the abovereasoning as contended the officialrespondents well as by the by as private respondents. When the fact remains that the applicants having qualified in the departmental

I I
I

examinations able to gain furtherpromotions per and as Ithe

\-

Recruitment Rules andalsoexercisinq supervisory role

-l'l-

we responce-5' are at loss the as against private

to note

the pay' whereas' as to how they couldbe give: lesser were givei higherpay' We do not privaterespondents by devlslngthe find fault with the official respondents thoseemployees of to scheme extendthe benefits suchof of yearsbut that for ln who are stagnatlng service number doesnotmeanthatlntneguiseofimp|ementationofthe the who acquired llke the appllcants persons said scheme, of the necessary qualifications vlz'' completion promotions regular and examlnations gained departmental Rulescould be glven lesserscale of as Der Recruitment the positlon who pay. The privaterespondents are holding ofSr.Accountantsfunctioningunderthecontrolofthe than the cannotbe flxedin a gradepay higher applicants for the removal of applicants. infact, F'R'22 provides when their pay of seniors up by anomalies stepping the instantcase' to juniors happened draw more pay' In the lnferior than who are functionlng the privaterespondents qualifled to be the applicantsano who are not even are given promotedto the post held by the applicants of implementation the higher pay scale in the guise of in whichis unsustainablelaw' scheme rendered the Eventhough ApexCourtln its decision 7. and others v' West in Secretary,FinanceDepartment and Associatlon others 1993 Service Registration Bengal of that determination (1) SUPP SCC153 heldto the effect

- LZ-

and not of pay scalesis the piira^/ :.rnction the executives the SupremeCourt the judiciary,in the very same decision, that iire Courts have jurisdictionto grant has emphasised relief to the aggrievedemployeeswhey they are unjustly treated and when the state action ls arbitrary' In the instant are unjustly case, we are of the opinionthat the applicants private treated in as much as higherpay scaleis givento the inferiorthan the applicants who are functioning respondents to themselves be promoted and who have not even quallfied to the posts which are held by the applicants' B. guise we Eventhough, are.ofthe opinionthat in the

private respondents of of implementation the scheme,the and one are given the higher pay scalesthan the applicants is to quash the office of the relief claimed in the applications to the memorandumwherein such benefit is extended not in private respondents, the interest of justice' we do being propose to take away such benefits which are However' we are extended to the private respondents' by directing the inclined to give relief to the applicants MACPscheme in resoondentsto extend the benefit of the their grade pay at favour of the applicants by fixing such benefit was Rs.5400/- w.e.f. the date on which extendedto the private respondents'

9.

applications For the reasonsstated above'both the

terms : of are disposed in the following

-1-

,' s?
"There will be u o,r"o,o" to the responden$to grant the revisedpay to the applicants extending by the benefit of MACp Scheme in favour of the applicants fixing their grade pay at Rs.5400/by from the date on which the said benefit was extended to the private respondentsand to disburse the accrued arrears, if any, to the applicants withina periodof four weeksfrom the date of receiptof copy of this order. However, there will be no orderas to costs."

, '

, 1

, . , r , , f J r , i r < .i - f r . ^ r r , , ( , ( r , 1 , , , t ,/ ) ,,

l i t i i -J . , ,

"l /i trlj I)l-:1,; 't-,

!'ot,),,,

a\'\
ii,\/{