Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench
TA No.1088/2009
New Delhi this the 29th day of January, 2010.
Honble Mr. Shanker Raju, Member (J)
Honble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A)
R.S. Bisht & Others -Applicants
(By Advocate Shri Vikas Sethi for ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate)
-Versus-
Delhi State Industrial & Infrastructure
Development Corporation through its
Chairman, N-36, Bombay Life Building,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi-1100001. -Respondents
(By Advocate Shri Biji Rajesh for Shri Gaurang Kanth, Advocate)
O R D E R
Honble Mr. Shanker Raju, Member (J):
Applicants, who are Assistant Grade-1, through this TA seek complete parity in the pay scale with their counterparts in Government of India by demanding the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 w.e.f. 15.9.2006 from the date of their promotion and further revision to the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 with effect from the same date with all consequential benefits.
2. Applicants, who are working in DSIDC where the pay scale as per the Regulations are adopted at par with Government employees pertaining to the recommendations made by the 3rd, 4th and 5th Central Pay Commissions, state that as per the resolution passed as late as on 17.3.2008 and on 21.12.2008 in the 24th meeting of the Board of Directors for all other categories 6th Central Pay Commissions recommendations at par with Government have been adopted whereas the category of applicants has been left out without any reasonable basis. It is stated that apart from Government, even the DDA in case of their Assistants have accepted the recommendation of the 5th/ 6th Central Pay Commissions regarding revision of pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500, which has been accorded on RTI by the respondents. In the above view of the matter, it is stated that applicants have been discriminated arbitrarily in the matter of pay scales, which is illegal, as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel of respondents vehemently opposed the contentions and stated that service conditions of applicants under DSIDC (Staff Service) Rules, 1978 it is nowhere mentioned that the respondents are adopting the pay scale applicable to Central Government employees. It is stated that Board of respondents can adopt different pay scales than pay scales existing in Central Government for want of parity. Learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in S.C. Chandra v. State of Jharkhand, (2007) 8 SCC 279 to buttress his plea.
4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material on record. No doubt, fixing the pay scale is either the prerogative of the expert body or the Government, yet the doctrine of equal pay for equal work has since partaken the character of a fundamental right. The same has to be adhered to, as ruled by the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. B. Renjith Kumar, (2009) I SCC (L&S) 142.
5. In the matter of equality in pay scale, once the counterparts in other departments have been given it is mandated by the Government to examine the matter to bring the concept of parity, as ruled by the Apex Court in State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh, 2009 (11) SCALE 149.
6. As we find as per Staff Service Rules, Rule 7, a saving clause that matters not specifically covered shall be governed by the provisions of the corresponding rules and regulations applicable to Central Government employees. It is no doubt that before implementation of 4th CPC the pay scale of Assistant Grade was at par with the Government employees. It is also established on record that for all other categories the Board has adopted the pay scale meant for Central Government employees, yet the category of Assistant Grade-I has been isolated without any reasonable basis, though it may the prerogative, yet when their counterparts in DDA have been granted the desired pay scale and when the applicants perform identical duties and their functional requirements are also identical they cannot be discriminated in the matter of scale of pay. As there is an invidious discrimination meted out the same cannot be countenanced in the wake of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
7. Accordingly, this TA stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to re-examine the claim of applicants in the light of our observations and law on the subject for grant of pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 and thereafter Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 15.9.2006 with arrears, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
(Dr. Veena Chhotray) (Shanker Raju)
Member (A) Member (J)
San.
No comments:
Post a Comment