Original Application No. 477 of 2009. Case: 1. K. S. Rajendrakumar S/o D. Sukumaran, Senior Loco Inspector, Southern Railway, Divisional Office, Trivandrum, 2. J. Krishnankutty S/o R. Janardhanan Pillai, Senior Loco Inspector, Southern Railway, Quilon, 3. S. Kulathu Iyer S/o Karumpan Madhavan, Senior Loco Inspector, Southern Railway, Divisional Office, Trivandrum, 4. K. M. Dasappan S/o Karumpan Madhavan, Loco Inspector, Assistant Divisional Mechanical Engineer's Office, Southern Railway, Ernakulam Vs 1. Union of India, Reprsented by Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi, 2. Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Chennai, 3. Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division, 4. Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberOriginal Application No. 477 of 2009
CounselT. C. Govindaswamy, Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
JudgesGeorge Paracken (Judicial Member) & K. George Joseph (Administrative Member), JJ.
IssueCode of Civil Procedure, 1908
Judgement DateJuly 16, 2010
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal

Judgment:

K. George Joseph (Administrative Member), (Ernakulam Bench)

1. Aggrieved by the cancellation of the order of stepping up of pay at par with their junior, the applicants have filed this O.A. with a prayer to quash the order of cancellation and for a direction to the respondents to continue to grant the applicants the stepped up pay.

2. The applicants and their junior, Shri S. Seran, were initially appointed as Assistant Loco Pilot in Palghat Division of Southern Railway. The 1st and 2nd applicants were appointed as Diesel Assistant on 06.11.1984 and the 3rd and 4th applicants were appointed as Diesel Assistant on 02.01.1985. They were promoted as Goods Driver on 31.12.1990 and further promoted as Loco Running Supervisor on 12.02.1994 and 01.03.1994 respectively. Shri Seran was appointed as Assistant Loco Pilot on 05.08.1986, promoted as Goods Driver in 1992 and was later promoted as Loco Running Supervisor on 12.03.1997, In the common seniority list of the Loco Running Supervisor of Southern Railway maintained for the purpose of promotion as Senior Loco Inspector published on 01.06.2002, the applicants were at serial No. 39 to 42 respectively and Shri Seran was at serial No. 75. The applicants were drawing the basic pay of Rs. 6900/- in the scale of Rs. 6500-10500 as on 01.03.1997. When Shri Seran was promoted to the same scale on 12.03.1997, his pay was fixed at Rs. 7500/-. This anomaly had occurred only for the reason that, for the purpose of fixation of pay, 30% of the revised pay in the in the running cadre according to the V CPC, was taken into account in the case of Shri Seran. The applicants had filed O.A. No. 683 of 2006 which was closed on 15.07.2008 taking judicial notice of memorandum dated 12.06.2008 whereby the applicants' pay has been stepped up at par with their junior, Shri Seran. But subsequently vide order dated 23.06.2009, the respondents cancelled the aforesaid memorandum. Hence this O.A.

3. The applicants submit that Annexure A/1 order cancelling the stepping up of their pay is totally non-speaking and, therefore, arbitrary and illegal. The contentions raised by the applicants in their representation were not answered. As regards the identical case of Shri Selvakumar, it was stated in the order of cancellation that the matter has been referred to the Chief personnel Officer. It means that the respondents had not waited for a clarification from the CPO, who is the head of the personnel branch in Southern Railway. The applicants and their junior Shri Seran belong to Palghat Division prior to their promotion to the Loco Running Supervisor cadre (LRS cadre). The applicants' junior was not drawing more pay than that of the applicants at any point of time prior to his promotion to the LRS cadre. The higher pay drawn by Shri Seran is on account of 30% addition of basic pay in the revised pay scale. The Railway Board orders at Annexures A-5 and A-6 squarely cover the situation. Therefore, the applicants are entitled to the benefit of stepping up of their pay as was originally granted.

4. The respondents contested the O.A. It was submitted that the disparity in respect of the pay of the applicants and their junior arose from two contributory factors, viz. the promotion of junior from the post of Diesel Assistant to Goods Driver and Senior Goods Driver respectively and consequent fixation in the V CPC scale of pay taking into account 30% running allowance. The decision of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 135/2008 which is identical to the present O.A. is binding. Further, they relied on the decisions of Apex Court in C.A. No. 8852 of 1996 dated 14.07.1997 and in C.A. No. 1022 of 2001 dated 13.01.2005. The applicants and their junior are in different seniority units prior to joining LRS cadre. Hence no comparison can be made. Comparison of pay of between persons is permissible only if the junior and senior are in the same seniority unit/post/scale in the lower and higher post/scale. Shri S.Seran was appointed to LRS cadre only after decentralization of initial grade in the cadre whereas the applicants were promoted to the LRS cadre before the decentralization. The case of Shri Selvakumar was referred to the 2nd respondent as the Annexure A-8 order stepping up of his pay has been issued by that respondent, for further action. After the postings in LRS cadre, the applicants and their junior belong to different seniority units and hence, the pay while working in the different units, is not liable to be compared simply for the reason that before decentralization the employees were in the same seniority units. The case of the applicants does not depict any anomaly in their pay with reference to the posts worked...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT