Original Application Nos.350,402,427,493 And 494 Of 2013. Case: 1. K. Govindan 2. T.S.Vaithianathan 3. S. Balasubramanian 4. K. Somasundaram 5. G.Sriramulu Vs 1.Union of India 2.The General Manager 3.The Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer 4. The General Manager, Integral Coach Factor. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | Original Application Nos.350,402,427,493 And 494 Of 2013 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Ratio Legism, Adv. and For Respondents: Ms. A. Lakshmi, Shri P.S. Eathirraj, Ms. S. Sujatha and Shri P. Srinivasan, Advs. |
| Judges | Shri K. Elango, Judicial Member |
| Issue | Administrative Law |
| Judgement Date | November 17, 2016 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Order:
Mr. K. Elango, Judicial Member, (Madras Bench)
-
As the facts and the relief sought in the OAs are similar these applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
-
The applicants in these five applications prayed for refixation of their basic pension at not less than 50% of the minimum in PB-II(Rs.9300-34800) plus Grade Pay Rs.4200/- with effect from 1.1.2006 with all consequential benefits.
-
Brief facts leading to the filing of the OAs are that the applicants while holding the post of Head Clerk/Master Craftsman/Travelling Ticket Inspector/Chargeman 'B'(now redesignated as Junior Engineer-II) in the Pay Scale of Rs.1400-2300 were retired during the years 1992,1993 and 1994 On implementing the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission, the minimum pension of the applicants were fixed at not less than 50% of the revised pay scale of Rs.5000-8000. The corresponding Pay Scale as per the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission was in Pay Band-2 Rs.9300-34800 plus Grade Pay Rs.4200/- The grievance of the applicants is that instead of fixing their pension in Pay Band-2, their pension was fixed in Pay Band-1 (Rs.5200-20200) plus Grade Pay Rs.2800/- vide the impugned orders in the respective OAs. Aggrieved by the same, the applicants are before us.
-
A reply has been filed in all the OAs wherein the submissions made by them are more or less same. It is their contention that the Railway Board's Circular dated 18.3.2010 relied on by the applicants is applicable only for the existing employees who are on the cut-off date of implementation of various pay commissions and the same cannot be extended to pensioners who were retired earlier. The acceptance of various Pay Commissions recommendation is purely a policy decision of the Government and the pensioners like the applicants cannot expect higher replacement scales in compare with serving employees. It is also the contention of the respondents that the pension of the applicants has been revised in accordance with the instructions issued by the nodal Ministry i.e. DOP & PW, which are very clear that the pension revision will be based on the corresponding scales held by the pensioners and not by post or designation It is pointed out by them that the issue has already been settled before the Hon'ble Apex Court and similar kind of bunch of OAs have also been dismissed by this Tribunal. For the above...
To continue reading
Request your trial