Hon`ble Supreme Court of India common Judgement dated 09/12/14
Transcription
Hon`ble Supreme Court of India common Judgement dated 09/12/14
Circulor Office of the Principol Controller of Accounis (Fys) I 0-A. S. K. Bose Rood, Kolkolo-7O1 0Ol Dote, 03/O3/2O15 No. Poy/Tech-l/0116'h CPC)/201 5 /01 To (i) A (ii) A (iii) A up Controllers (P) Nolondo (P) Korwo Subiect: Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndio common Judgemenl doted 09/12f14ln respect of Dqlo Enlry Operotors in Ordnonce & Ordnonce equipment Foctories. ln the mqlter of higher poy Fqctories Orgonisotionr scole in respect o copy of Hon'ble of Doto Entry Operotors Supreme Court of lndio of Ordnqnce common Judgement doted 09/12/14, circuloted vide OFB No-3a0/OA-01 /09 /Y A/ 115 /HAPP /A/Nl, doted 14/O1 /15 is hereby uplooded in rhe PC of A web site for informotion ond guidqnce to oll concerned. Brqnch AOs under your control moy pleose be intimoted qccordingly. _.4 _ Addl. Controller of Accounts (Fys) Copy lo ..-/EDP Cell MO Locol for informoiion w.r.io obove, it is requested to uplood the leiter ond the Hon'ble Supreme Couri verdict in the nel. 39---) Sr. Accounti Officer (Fys) '3'19 1 REPORTABLE IN TI,IE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPEI,IATE L'URISDICTIO}T C]V]L APPEAL NO. 10862 OE 2014 (arising out of SLP(C) rta 26911 of 2010) SECRET Y, DEPARTMENI OF PERSONNE!, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES & PENSION & ANR. ., APPELLANTS VERSUS crv]L APpEAL NOS. 10853 10864 OF 2014 (arisrng out of SLP(C) Nos.28595-95 of 2010) UNION OF INDIA E ORS. ,,- APPEILANTS ],ERSUS U6.D. & ORS. ETC.ETC. BHANGALE C]VIL -.. APPEAL NO. 10865 OF 2014 (arislng out of SLP(C) No.31613 of UNION OF INDIA RESPONDE}TTS d ORS. 2011) ,.. APPiLLA.I{'TS VERSUS 'N/. or*, n o*". .,, RESPONDEN]TS WrLb C]VIL APPEAL NO- 10856 OF 2014 (aiising oub of Sl,P(C) Nos,3306 of 2Al2) I'NION OF INDIA & ORS. APPEILANTS ]/ERSUS SUNJAY GURVEKAR RESPONDEIIT CIVIL iipPFAl, No y)A6j OF 2Or4 Page 1 * 2 lrr r eilrE cul cf Sl,. 1c UNION OE INDIA & ) N.s irr!6 .,r 2a1l) ,-- APPELLANTS ORS. VERSUS SATYENDRA PRASAD & RESPONDENTS ORS \1 L.P G. UE N]L Delay condoneC Leave gr dnted 2- I The respondents who werc posLed in differenl- departmenLs rn the Mjnr-sLrles of Unior, of India as Data EnLry Operator Grade 'A', moved applicaLlons before Ehe Central AdminisLrative Tribunals for grant of pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 with effecE from 1" 1985 The Tribunal allowed Lhe applications ,January, The judqment orders passed by the Tribunal having affirmed by the High and CourL are under cha]lenge in these appeals The facls leading to Ehe cases are as follows: A nrlnrber of posEs of ElBEtronic Data Processing were created in the differenL departmenuo of MinisLries of the Government of India Persons were appolil(ed againsl such Electronic processing posts wilh diff€fEnt rromenclatures tiFewise Key Punch OperaLo., Punch verifyinq Op6f,6tlor, Planning Assistant, Punch verifier, Data Technjcal Assi6Egllg, Punch cum verifier cum (Itollerith) Page 2 , r,.. s 3 L'l a ,rllr.il ir r:rr !--i, airr.:rr::si.'il] Lr.de r rLrg.].s.ron rn paragr.aph rr I thiL E):anirre ti1.: iiit er ..t :lepaft merL .ri :.rr..rr.rrc3 .rir.i ]].!r!gcst rcoigan L::;ir.l] of sh.jut,l exrearng ElecLronr. Data Pro.essirg posLs and prescribe uuiform pay scales anC des-gnations in consultation wiEh Lhe DeparLmen! of personnel & TrainrrLg In pursuance of aLove suqgesLion, a CornrniLtee had beer set up b], Lhe DeparLment of Ulectronics rn November, 1985 AfLer car.eful c.rrsiCeral,ion o! Lhe re coromenda t r ons nade by tshe said C.n:..Lir1.c.r, G.,!r.ir.xteir: o: :1 .!,.t:.je i.r iLidia hdc . deci.reC Lo inrroduce l.tr..rLr.-Lrr. t.rta Pro.rcc!:il:j p.r.rL!r j_r', l,irnisrrj-,; pay O iq_ F 7 i1) /IC185 (41) da!,ed 11: Seprember, 1989/ retcyarLE por.ron o: whrch reads as fol lo{s : No 't{o F.7 ( 1) / rC/8t; ( 44 ) Goverrment cf r.dia Minist ry af Finance ,epar:amert af Experdlture Iflp.l en,enta tjon Cet t New Delhi, .lared tidi sepr, 89 QFFICE UEMQEAIDIY subj Fationaljsaajor? of pay scales of Efectranic Processrng posts: Dat a Ihe unde.signed is di.ecred ro refer ta the Fourth Centi'a l pay Commissrdn conrarned i. paragraltr il 45 of LLp Reparx qherein ir y,,as suggesred tna. the depa.tmert of ,.lect.onic should examire ard suggest r,4organisatro. of exjsrjng Elecaronjc DaLa P.ocessing pcsas ard plescribe urifarn pay scates and desiqnaL-rons rn consultaaio. with the Departnent af Persarnel- In pu-.suance al abaye suggestian, a. Commjaree irad been sEl up by Departnent ot ETectranics j, Novenber, 798t; AIter .a.eful conside.ratlan at the .ecommendacions nade fy .his C.maittee, Government of lndia has decided ta irtroduc-- fo-llck,ing pay sa.ucEure fcr Electraiic Data re.o.nmendations .f Processinq po-sts l Page 3 l-) ]j.'] Tlrrs wr ll be Enil ;, Ir.'r !!tr,M . :; E rr1 ll .-rt i:,.ire Fremo.lo,al crade Err.y for l,dtders oi legr ee 1n EigateerLtg af t.sr gradual icn er.rn s.r P..e/Ma!ns .. losL oraduaai'n By i Assis!rn. Grad.'E' I P,.mD.io.a.1 ctarre u,der rl'jeir admrnrscrac Process;r9 posts scales arrd recr'ui'ment .1acl ana r i... necessaiy as per pay sl'rrrcEu Minisa rY/DePaLLnen E ' Page 4 !r.rL,- atr rir-- gra.ies jr lti) d.p.nd tt pro!..res l. .r.er.: arrl t' , 1. ql1tcL) r: .ca existriE at adv;sors !.es-piE it /rl t be .rore rr 1r nI)I)lo/a, of i rrancial a.i sublect to !rocedurEs l.ir,l doon fo. tire purpose |r.j ji a,!lr iror ae dFl :i Ir.r st-'r:!'!--i)irrr:rr.,, indicated aga)nsL each grade Tne qua llfi.a. io.s , r and i l tustratjre anlY abave para 7 at rerTeq carry ouL the ,r / I DEparL rents/Mirr;str-ies existing EDP posEs ]n ac.or,iance ,itn rec.urtmerL .rules as alr.ady preEcritied })/ r:ne' r 'Io ersure uriformitv i" regard La RecfuiXnent RLrles for a]re EDF posts, Depaftnent af Persoirel & 1'rarr-ing iri i)fing reguested to devise model adopted by " itirlstry/DePr.t.nt 5 PersonEci, Pub]l,tr GFicvances ' ?ensic,ns, GovernmenL of Indla bY 1990 I I 'r, February, O 14. r\o AB a4atl/t5/A9 Estl, (RR) dated forwarded a copy ol Ehe llodel RecruitmenE Rules for various caLegories of posLs in the ElecLronic DaLa Processing Discipline The Model RecruitmenL Rules are based on the suggestions conLained in Lhe DeparLment ol ExpendiLure's o M No-F ?(1)/ICl86(44) dated 11tL September, 1989 ln the said Model RecruiLment RuIes the followlng grades of Data Entry Operators with scale6 of PaY and gualif ications uere sholtn: 'th1s di)1 be ett,Y far Higher Grade qith Secandary DaLa af ktaq)edse This vi17 be enLry 9.ade ,ot g.aduaEe wi rrr knawledge af Data E ttY ua.k af pronaLjanai Gtade far Data Entry Operataf tailjhg crade ehich by transfer an dnd deputaLian, Page 5 a pr.n.ii.nal Cta Enl rl: Jron aP?ratar At.,le Lnr.a ty Iatliit:i a Degree af rccogtize.t LIniwersitY wi rI or equivaie,E scieoce, Matl1enati.s, comme..e, E.ononi.s, proviso Lo Arlicle 309 of qhe Co stiLuLion cf India issued a Rule. from Department of Revenue, GovernmenE of India regulating the method of recruitmenL to Group 'c' lTechnical) posts in the [fectronic Data Processing Discipfine of Lhe field formations of the Central Board of Excise and Customs, DeparEment of Revenue' Ministry of Finance, commonly known as the Electronic Data Processing, Disclpline (Group 'C Technical Posls) Recruitment Rules, 1992 notified bn 3'd April, 1992- Therein Ehe scales of pay, quafifications cf appointmenL, source of fecruiLment, etc were shown as fol1o\rs: EB.5A This iil1 be entrY .r Hiqher i.tb secandz k.awledge ot Data Direct RecruiEhenc This wi.71 be enLrY qrade fo. Erradua.e ;i Et, kta Tedqe o! Da.a Entty wotk at pranatianal Grade tar Data E Lry APeraLor railing crade Page 5 I kal.l]]-:,.1.;ns-fe..r J--l r: r.1,r, 1.t..;1ta). trcn oper:toi fa i ting bf 711e.. crade E-try wnr.l) by a,J.ric.io.ai crade llom ,.irv op.ra.Dr G'rade fdi lr.s wnicn b! ., '..i 7. r..rIi rmP.i In t]:e Depar.tment ot Personndf and Training, Ministry of Personrlel, !,ub1ic ariewances and Pensions, a Rr,le under provlso to A.rl,1c1e 109 of the ConstiLuLion v,as already exrsLinq for MlnisLerial Group 'C' PosEs, namefy, lhe Commrssron (Non MlnlsLeriel, (HolleriLh) -4ssistanL Group 'C' Non Staff SelecLion pos!s of Technical anC Puncher-cumverifier (HolleriEh) RecruiLnenL Rules r9'78. The aforesaid Rriles, 1978 was supersecled oy L-6 r ol r. .onn ss'or .F.L-ctro_r( Ddta D)o'ossl.ng croup 'c' Posts of Data Entry Discipline) Recruilment Ru1es, it was notlfied 1996. cn 10i5 OcEober, 1996 In the said Rules again sirnilar scales oi pay, qualrfrcaLions, method of recruitmenl-, etc were shourr which are as follous: 'lhls nrL) be enaty far Higher arade secandat:t/ wi th Data ,kidkledge of Dr.ccr ne..ui tment This sill be entry gr:de for graduaae wi.h krawledse ..td Ent,r vark af Page 7 "}i yei.s regrular se.vi.e failinq \4hi.h by .ia.sfer de4ltaa r.n, and pEr.r,-.aaqe,!y di.e.. I 8. From the Ofiice Memorandum and Rrr]es, as noLiced above, the folloL,ing facts emerge : (i) In view af tbe r;cannendac lons af Faurth Central Pay Commr.ssjo, (paragraph j1 q5 of the Repart), the Governnent af India constjtr]tei a Connittee to suggesL the reorganisatian of existjnEr deparEment at Electranic DaLa pracessing posts sucir as Data Entry Aperatar which were in lhe scale of pay of Rs-95A-1750. (ii) By Office Memorandum dated j7.h September, 1989, pursuant to the afoLesaid .suggestions Ehe Governmerrt af India delrided ro jntrqduce pay sErucEure far Electronic Data pracesEjng pasts with Eeparate fiome]rclatures that isr (i)Data Entry Operator Grade ,A, Rs-7150-150A wjth entry crade far. Hlgher Secandary wath knawledge af Data Entry wark; (ii) Data Entry Operatar Grade 'B' - 1s pLamotranal past of Data Entry Page I aperat.! crace , ', ) tr);l;rl),, Data Entt._ oper.aror Gia.Je 'a'' rs pr(,r r i{]n posr af Data Entry Operator Gra.le 'B' ,i/,.r ,aEa Entry ApeLatar Grade 'D' 1s pronotio, /)usi: of Data Entry OperaLar Grade 'C' ard D.rtn l:tt)tt:y Operacor Grade '8, is pronoEiaral past ol Data Entry operaLor Grade 'D' . For such 9. promot ion, l-he person 1s noL only requ i red The hlgherr post of DaEa Enrry OperaEor Grade 'B,rin the scale oI pay of Rs_1150 2200 and higher posLs of DaLa Entry Operator crade 'C' aDd DaEa EnLry operaLor Grade .Il, can be filled up by promotion on the recommendation of Staff SelecLion CommiEtee. The person having qualilicaLion and experience cannot cfaim promotion Lo the higher posE, his turn of piomotion comes when d wacancy arises or in case Lhere is'a cause of action 10. Case6 before Certsral Adhini6tratiwe AfLer rationalisaLion Trihnna'l of pay scales of Efectronic Data Processing posts as Daba Entry Operator, numlcer of persons, who were working against lower posEs of Key punch OperaLor in Lhe scale of pay of Rs 950-1500 and redesignal_ed as Data Entry Operator Grade 'A', claimed that they are entiEted for the scale of pay of Rs.1350 2200. CenLral AdministraLive Tribunal Benches situated in different SLates, passed contradictory orders- In many of Lhe cases refjefs were gr.anted by aflo,ring the scale of pay of Paqe 9 ll) Rs Il50 2200 Lo Ehose who ari, .Ijr.rlgnaLed as IlaEa EnLr.y gp.rintol Grade 'A, whereas some clairnN ,rere retecEed as well Some ot (bE examples are as fotlous (i) Ce tral Adm.r]rr.qtrac jve Tribunat, Cuttack Ben.:h, Crissa rn OA Na.249/1997 had granted the pay s.ale of Rs 1)\a 2200 ta Data Entry Operator Grade ,A,. The S_Lp filed against the ,same !/as djsmr:ssed sutnnarily an 15th May, t99t Cenri-al Admrrrrsrrarr.ve Tribunaf, Ahmedalad Benc-h, cujarat in y_A.yishnu prasad & Ars- v U.O-I & Ors by judgnent ddted 1sr Septenber, 1999 dlso g,rarted prayer direcLing the auEiozitie to pay r]]e apptjcant.s scate af pay of lir/ Rs-135A-22A0 fiii) Centraf Admjnistratiye TrjbunaT. Bench in aA Na.957,/199A by judgneni December, 1992 alfowed the benefits in l.he employees-Da ta Entry OperaCors. Hyderabad (|v) t6""ri"", refief was grante,J by the Central AdminisEratjye Tribanaf , Lucknow Eench. lv) oA which wai preferred befare the principaf Bench of Centra l qdr,.nrsr?d(iv- T ia)1al I,J- )) Delhi was, hawever, dismi ssed. (vi) l4any af the petitians agajrst the aforesaid JudEmencs 4/ which unran ot indta maved before C,he .sl.preme Court nere djsmj.ssed r]r fimine. (vii)'I'he tral Adninistrative Tribunal !trra-ipLrr M.H. Bag & O.rs _ ys. UOI & Ars (AA No 142 af 95) affo$/ed siliifar benefi ts referring E,he decrsiors af different Ce Page 10 11 Benchs af CenEra di ffeleJr t States I /r,fl lrrscraafve L'r1rl1tna at I 11. The appellanLs -Union o{ Tndia, SecreEary, DepartmenL of Personnel & Training, Minist.ray of public crievances and pensions and another. brought to Lhe Irtice of Lhis Court the following judgments and order passcd by Lhe different Benches Central Admiri sr lr) raLive Tribr.al, JudgniFr( .ia.ed 28.09 )t99 passed by r:.) o A,t,r i42/1995; CAT ,rabaTpur Bench (ii.) Judgm--nL dated oJ.7a.2ao1 passed -by i! O A tJ{) 150/2AA7i CA,r r,Dcknaw Bench Ii1;),Iudgment dat:ed 27 0.1.J00.1 passed by C:Ar Mumbai in o-a No 737/2AA2, (lv) Jadgment dated 79 72,.2AA6 passed by cAT Madras in A.A No-3s2 ta i54/2A05 12- The Cenlral AdmilistraLive Tribunal, I\4adras Bench Bencr) Bench by judgmenL dated 7.h Novembe-r, 2008, howewer, dismissed the O.A.No.87O of 200?. The said order was chal.Ienged before the High Court. The Hrgh Court of ,Judicature at Madras by judgment dated 14!h October, 2009, referring to Ehe different crders passed by t.]re various Central Administrative Tribunal Benches alfowed the wr.it peLiEion filed by the respondenE-T V.L N Mallrkarjuna Rao- 13. In vielv of the decrsions passed by Ehe differenL Benches of Centrai Admjnislr.llive Tribunal , some confusion appears to have Laken place in i:he DeparLmenL of Centraf covernment. Bv its Circular No CGDA No.EDP /t13/IllPC) /vol-14 dated 4th ,fanuary, Page 11 l2 2006, Lhe ollice oi ConLr ,,l l , r G^ner.ll of Ilefence Accounls fixed inLimaLed that the pay ol the l)Iios Grade A & B has to be and from 1.1 86 or from Lhe date ol appointment lihichever is laEer afrears are [o be drawn Lhat: such decisrcn has proviso to ArLicle 309 accoralirigly. The said letLer does not show been ral"en by the Unlon of lndia or under of Lhe ConsLitution of lndia reEpg!dea!Ele:pp!1s!4!5 l).eEa!e 14. case qt a@i n i qtral-iwe Tribunal-r ihe central Respondent T v L N Mallikarjuna Rao, pr"llrsuanE to Key Punch operators examinaLion 19g9, was appointed on 11'i' septenber' 1989 as Kcy Punch oper.ator He was r:edesignated as DaEa EnEry OperaLor c.ade 'A' w e f. 16'r Novemirer, 1992 He submr'tLed a represenLaLion on 11" l,larch. 199'r for. seeking placemenL in Lhe Data EnEry and OperaLor Grade 'B' on the basrs cf his educaEion qualificaLron the same was relecLed by Ietter dated 25rb JuIy' 1994 on Lhe ground thair the posL ol DaLa ErLry OperaEor Grade 'B' in SLaff selection Grade 'A'Comrnissron is a promoLionaf post of Data E:rlrrY Operator one coul'i l,,]ereIy, on accoun! of hrgher educatlonal qualificaLion not c lairi higher Post. a99q ' 15. Agalnst the order of relection dared 25t! JulY, 'r v-1,.N- Mallikarjuna Rao moved before Lhe Central respondent in the AdmrnistraLive 'l'rrbuial - The conLenLion of the respondent _ Grade said case ldas lhat he should be givelr Data EntrY OPerator was Gracluale on the 'B' r.ighL fr.rm his inlEial appoirlEnenL as he dated 11'f daLe of applying for the Dcsi and Lhat in view of O.M Page 72 13 September, 1989 Dar-a Entry tor graduates OJ), The r{tiir cradF B would be enLry grade registered before CenLraf AdminisLratlve Tribunal, MadraH ll.rnch as O.A. No.87O of 2007 which was dismissed on meriL by Ehe Cenrral AdministraLive Tribunal on 7rL November, 2008. Against t-h.| said judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, frled Writ PeLition NO- reslJondent .1'. v. L. N. Mallikarjuna Rao 3195 of 2009 before tshe High Court of .Iudicature aE Madras. The Dlvision Bench of the High Court by Ehe impugned judgmenE dated 14.t ocLober, 2009 set aside the judgment of the CenEral AdminisErative Tribunal and allowed the writ peLrtion darecLinq lhe appellanLs to g.anE benefit of pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 w.e.f . Lhe date of iniE.ial respondent afong with all appoinl,ment of the consequential benefits in vrew of Lhe decisions of Ehe differenE Benches of the Central AdministraLive Trlbuna I 16. Respondents S.D. Bhangale, S.H. Patil and R.P. Joshi were appointed as Punch and Verifier Operators in the Ordnance Factory, under the MinisLry of Defence, Government of Indta. One of them as appointed on 2oth Septen$er, 1988 as Punch and Verifier OperaLor' 1n the pay scale of Rs 950-1500. After reor.ganizaLion of ElecEronic DaEa Processlng Posts, Lhe respondenLs redesignated as Data Entr.y OperaLoIS Grade 'A'. On 10.h June, 1999, the respondents were promoEed tc the post of Data EnLr.y Operators Grade 'B' in the oa1, s.ale of Rs 4500 7000 u.e-f. AfEer. abouL Lwo years of 10:r June, 1999 their: promotion, respondents S.d. ?age 13 14 Bhangale and others made repres(ltr.rt ion Lo gran! Ehem pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 from their iniEi t daLe of appointmenE. However, having not been qranl,ed suclr retief, the respondents fited O-A.Nos.231 and 240 of 2003 before the Cenl,raf AdminisEraE.ive Trlbunal, \r1th praycr to exEend benefits of pay scale ot Rs.1l50 2200 from the dal:e of their iniLial appointment as Bombay Bench Punch and Verifier Operators. On contest, the Central AdminisLraEive l.ribuna1, Bomt,ay Bench by its detailed common judgmenL and order dared 2j.d Jutt/, 2004 dismissed the original applrcations filed by the respondents_S D Bhangate and others However, the said order has been seL aside by the Division Bench of the High Courl, of Judicarure aE. Bombay by rhe impugned judgmenr_ dated 28* August, 2At9 by referring Eo different decisions rendered Tribunal, bv different Benches of Ehe Central Administrative afflrmed by the judgmenL passed by the Hiqh CourE. 17. Respondents - V Ambi, Thi runavukkara su, A. Selvaraj and R. Ravi, were appointed in Heavy Alfoy penetrator project (HApp) under Ehe MinrsLry of Defence, covernmenL of India as planning Asslstant on casuaf basis u e f- 16rh Novernber, 1989, 25ri AugusL, 1989 and 20th September., 1989 in the then pay scale of Rs.950 1500, later orl Lhelr services wele regularized_ At Ehe time of Eheir appoinEmenL rn HAPP, it was a Joint Venture projecE of Defence Research and Del'elopment Organlzation and in 1990 HApp was transferred Lo Ordnance Factory Board and their services were regufarrsed. On 8,r, November, 1995, the Ministry of Defence re_ Page 14 15 designaied the Plannrng Assistn rr Lo Lra[a Entr]- Operaror crade ,A, uith hlgher pay scale of Rs ll'0 moved 150! The aforesaid respondenLs beforc the CenLraf Admrnr.r(raLive Tribuna], Madras Bench O.A-No.432 of 1997 seeking pdy s.:ale of Rs.1500 2660 \i.e.f 1n 11rn September, 1989. The Centsraf Adminrst]:ative Tribunal, Madras Bench dismissed Ehe said original aFplicalion by order dated 22"" July, 1999 The respondenEs lornlly filed O.A.No.?01 of 2009. By judqmenh daLed l,.i September, 201C, Centraf AdminisEratiwe Tribuna.L in OA No-701 of 2009 passed certain directions following the judgment of the High Court of Bombay in a simifar matter- The dppellanEs wer.e .lirected to grant pay scale of Rs. 1350 2200 Lo Lhe respondents. Berng aggraeved, the appellants f1led a w-rit peLiLion being W.P. No.6342 of 2011 befor.e the High Court of .Iudicature at Ma.lras. By Ehe impugned judgmenl: datred 17i March, 2011 Ehe Division tsench of Lhe High CourE of ,.IudicatrJre at lJadras dismissed the '.rrr L peLltion. 18. Respondent Sunjay curvekar was appointed on 11th Llanuary, 1990 as Puncher cum-Verifier in the office of Staff Selection Commissiorl, Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Public Grievance and Pensions in the pay scale of R.950 1500 He was redesignaLed as Data EnLry Operators Grade 'A' . He also moved before Lhe Centr.ll Admrnlsl,ratrve Tribunal, Bangalore Bench for similar re11ef. The CenLral AdminisLralive Trlbunal by the order challenqe made by r-he appeLlant Unlon of India, Djvjsion Bench of Paqe 15 16 Hiqh court of Karnataka, by ll)r. jmpugned -iu.tqmert dar-e.l SepEember, 2010 dismissed the wr1! peLltjon 22"4 19. Slmilar is the case of Ehe respondents SaEyendra prasad and ot.hers, who were rnittdlly appolnted againsL ce:rtaj_n technical posts ana rrere LaLer redesiqlr,ed as Data Entry OperaLors crade 'A'. Thev souqhL for similar relief by filrng O.A_No 1104 of 2002 before the CenLraI Admrnistrative Tribunal, patna Bench The CenLraf A.iminisLraEive Tribunat, paLna Bench by order. dated 291" May, 2009 djrecteC the appeltanEs to pay Ehe respondenEs scale of Data Enl,ry Operaror Grade 'A, vr e.f_ 1_1.1996 white mentioning Lhat arrears will be resLricled to one year before the ftllng of O.A. The sard order !/as chatlenged by Lhe appettant._Union ot India befor.e the Patna High Court. A Division Bench of the paEna Hlgh Court, by the impuqned judgment dated 22nd Februar:y, 2at2 dismissed the writ peEitlon being C.W J.C No. 1.723A of 2OO9 20 , LearneC coLrnse ! appearing on behalf of the appettants submiLEed Ehat the posE. cl DaEa Entry OperaLor Grade .B, wrLh pay scale oI Rs 1350-2200 is hrqher posL and the respondents have no right to claim th(i higher pay scafe merefy on the ground Ehat they ar.e GraduaLes and Lhat they were performing sirnitar dutaes. 21. On the other hanC, accordirlg to Lhe respon.lents, in vier./ of different decisions rendered by the Central Adminlstrative pay scale of Rs 1:-50-2200 from the due dat.e Paqe 16 71 22. Itr was furLher conLended on i)ehalf of Ehe respondents Lhat Lhe appellants having already iorplemented Lhe orders of the warious Benches ot Ehe central Adrninistratiwe Tribunal as affirmed have by Lhe High court, Ehey cannoE discriminaEe between tshose who already been granted the benefits and Ehe respondents herein' Reliance \,ras placed on one anoi:lier judgment passed by the Central a.lminrstrative Tr.ibunal as affirmed by the High Court23, We have consldered the rivaf conLentlons raised by the the material I earned counsel for the parties and gone thror.rgh placed on record. 24. Ptior Lo 1986 Ehere wer.e in existence two grades of operaEors viz. Junror Key Punch riperators in the scafe of Rs 25o-400 and pay Senior Key Punch operaLors in the scale of Rs l50-550 The scales of all the:ie posts as revised to Rs 950_1500 and Rs-1200 made 2040 respectively w.e f. :l:179a6 pursr'rant to recommendation by Lhe Fourth Pay Cornmission. These posLs came to be re designated B as DaLa Entr.y Operator, Grade-A and Data Entry Operator' Grade in the scale oi Rs.1150-1500 and Rs 135O 2200 respecLively pursuanE to Ehe office Memorandum dated 11 9 1989 L'hereby ElecEronic Data prccesslng PosLs have been reorganized' Ehe consider drfferenL pay scale on the was recommendations ol the Four.Lh pay Commission, a CommitLee constiLuLed Lo suggest reor:ganizaLion ot the exr-sting Electronic 25. With a view Lo ir. rlr i'_-ar.'ra rtl.. the Government of Page 1, 1B Indra vide Offrce Memorandrm 'l,ted 1l 9 1989 m.rdc the followinq resLructure for. ElecEronic DaLa Irrocessing S.No. De6ignaEioD of Pay Scale Ehe post Datsa EEt.ry Ope!ator Ent.ry 1150-1500 Grade -A 2 Data Opc ra t EnE or ry 7154 22DA of oualificarion/Source En Data I PosEs: Ery Thls i11 be enLry grade for hiqher secondary wi lh knowledge af Data Entry This will be enl,ry grade graduates for lrith knodledge of Data EnLry work Promotional grade for DaLa Entry Operator Grade-A S,rbsequenLly, Rules under proviso Lo Arl,icle Constltution memorandum oi Indi a has been framed 309 of the From Lhe aforesald and Rules iL is clear that. qualificaLion for Data Entry Operator Grade-A is higher secondary whereas the qualifical,ion for Data Ently Operator Grade B is graduaLion and it is a pro otlonal posL from Data EnLry OperaLor Grade A persons who have six )ears of experience. 25. The classiflcation of posLs and determinaEion of pay strucLure comes wrthin the exclusrve domain of the Executive and Lhe Tr.ibunal cannol siL in appeal over the wisdom of Ehe ExecuLive in prescribln_q ,rerLain pay slructure and grade in a parl,icular .eIv:--. Thnr- -ldy bo nole g.ddes than one in a parEicular 27. Tbte covernment on consideraLion of Lhe report submiLEed by Lhe Connrittee, issued OIfice Memorandum dated 11 91989 Page 18 19 grades oi prescr:r-bing therein CiffererrL l)iv' scales and dilferent of recruitment Eo Data Entry OperaLors besides Lhe nrode and mamer for each enLry grade posE 3s well as and qualifications court or and experience for promotional grades The etigibility its power of Ehe Tribunal, in our opinion' would be exceeding of the judicial review af iL siEs ili appeal over the decision ExeCuLiveintherlatterotpresCribingthepaystructureunLessib 14 and 15 of the is sholrn l-o be in vrolaLion of Articles ConsLitutiorl of IrLdia qualifications' Dilference in pay scates based on educational accountability' qual i iication' nature oi joh, responsibiliLj" violaLe ArLicle 14 experience and manner: of recr'uitment does not of the Consa-ituticn of lndia 8 1 1999 was 28. Before the CAT, Bombay Bench a chart dated uere listed which were produceC wherein cer:tain addiEional duties and above Lhe be performed by Data EnEry Operators Grade B over Lo Grade-A were duties assigned/pr:escribed for Data Entry operators prescribed lisEed Considering Lhe edr'rcational qualifications and Ehe rufes for under Lhe office Memorandum daEed 11 9 1989 Grade B and the appointmenr to l-he posts of DaLa EnL:ry operators' classificaLion of order assigning drjtles, !'e are of the view EhaL does not violaLe any Data EnLry Operators rn differenL grades' 14 and 15 of the righL of equality g'iaranLeed by ArLicles protection aonsliLuLlon nor does rL violate Ehe consLiLutionaf theretortj' agalnst hostlle or arbiLrary dlscrrflrlnatlorl- Paqe 19 2t urithoul- discus:ring the uatture of job, responsibillty, accountability and srraEus and rank of the one or other posLs of differents Data Encry OperaLors i e. crade-A or Grade B held tshaE they were per.forming similar duties and are hence enLiEled for equal pay and elrgible for Rs.1350-2200 on the principte of equal pay for equal work. BoLh Lhe Tribunal and the High Court also failed Lo notice that the Daca Entry Operator Grade B in the pay scale of Rs.1350 2200 is a promo!ronal grade and only Ehose who have six years of experience are eligible for such promotion. The promotiona] grade and entry grade cannot hawe Ehe same pay scale ard in absence of declaration ihat raLionatizaLion of pay scate of Electronic Data Processing posts made by Office 1a-9 a919 rs illegal, Memoran.ir.rm daEed no such benefit could have been granted. 29. BoEh the Tribunal and Ehe High Court also faited Eo notice Lhe sEatutory r:u1es fr.amed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constltution of lndia issued by the order of the president of India vide notif:rcation daEed 3.d Apri1, 1992 and norificarion daLed 10 10.1996 from Department of personnel and Training, I{inisLry of Personnel, P.c. and pensions. BcEh Lhe Tribunal and the High Court also erred rn rgnorlng the ]aw laid dovin by thls Court in plethora of jLrdgmenLs LhaE Ehe "princlple of equ.lf pay for equal work// is not atways applicabfe even if duties and luncLions are of simllar nature. Page 27 20 ex.eptiL-jn .ran be taKeIi Lo Lhe dilference in lhe pay str'uctlrres of enLry grade of DaLa EnLry opela[ors and the next higher grades ln nrost of r-he im!,ugied orders had fallcd Lc noLice the background o1 raLiooalizaLion of pay scafes of Electronic Data Processinq PcsLs 1r, these cases, both the Tribunals and Lhe High CAT Benches cou.L iailed Lo notrce thal l'efore ra!ionaLizaLion of Lhe posLs, i.e. prior. to 1986 Lhere were in existence Lwo grade of operators, Junror (ey Punch Operators in rhe scale of Rs.250-400 and Senior' Key Punch Ope.at.|s 1n the scale of Rs 350-550 The pay scales of Lhese posts were revised to 950 1500 and Rs 1200 2040 respecl-1vely In vie,/i of r.eorganizaLion of ElecEronic Data Processing posts the Key Punch OperaLors and other posts which had lower paY scale of F-s 260 400 was rer.rised Eo Rs.950 1500 ']'he j r posts were re-Cesignated as DaLa EnErv Operators Grade-A with w. f 1.1 1986 benefit of othe. revision of Lhe scale of Rs 1150 1500 In facL dcubfe benefit lvas g.anEed tcr Lhem w e f 1.1.1985 i e one revisicn i:l the scaie of Rs 950_1500 as they were entitled as per recomm,ondaLion of Pay Revision ConnitLee an.l the oLher levision w.e.f same datE i e. 1.1 1986 in Lhe scaLe of Rs 1150-1500 on the recoinmendaEion o: Lhe Committee set up by the DepartmenL of ElecLronics L,hi:h ,tas accept.ed by Lhc Government of India vide Office Memorandun dated l1 9 - 1989. 1E is only Ehose senlor Key Punch Operator:s Lrho were in the higher scale of Rs 350 560 having qr.)aiilrca[1or oi' qra.]uate and Hhose scale was revised Lo r?00 v, ef 1.1 1985 ]rrespecLive of Lhat dttLeLeiL ileiLeiieb " t 2040 l\l 'L'- ' Paqe 20 22 7^ Mewa Raj] Kanoj ia scieaces a,]d otbe.s, (79A9 ) A77 India InE titute of MedicaT 2 SCc 235 Lhis Court has inter alia held as fol lcws: "5. While considerlng the question of applicatjon of principle of ''Equal pay for equaf work,, it has to be borne 1n nind that it is open to the State to c]assify enpfoyees on the basis af qualifacations, (Jutj.es and responsibifil.ies of thd posts concerned. If the c.Iassificataon has reasonabfe nexus tlith the objectave sought to be achieved, efficjency in the admjnistratian, the State would be justjfied in prescrjbing different pay scafe but if the classification does not stand the test of reasonabfe nexus and the cfassifi-cation is founded on unreal/ and unreasonable basjs jf would be vlofative of Articfes 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Equafity nust be anong the equafs, Unequaf cannot cfaim equafjty. 7. Even assunitig that the petitfoner perforns sinjLar duties and futictions as those perforned by an Audiofogist, rf 1s not suffacient to uphofcl his cfaan for equal pay, As afready observed, an judging the equality of t/ork for the purpases of equaf pay, regard nLtst be had not onfy ta the drlt1es and functions but also to the educatianal quafificatiot)s, qualitatfve difference and the neasures of respot)sibiflty prescrjbed for the respective posts. Even if the dLtties and functiotts are of simifar nature but if the educatianaf quafificatjons prescrJbed for the two postS are dlfferent atld tttere is djfference in neasure of respousibjfittes, the principfe of ,/Equal pay for equal tr'ork// t!oufd not appfy 30 It fias iurther re affirmed in a three .Iudge Bench judgment of this Cour.t Ln Shyan Babu Verma & Others v. (Jnian af India t Others, (7994) 2 SCC 527 wherern Lhe Courtr hefd: 9... The nature of work nay be are or less the sane but scaje of pay nay vary based on aca(Jenic quafification eyperrer).F Which ilrsfifres l-Tacsifiaafion Thc prjnclple of 'equal pay tor equaL work, should not be applied jn a fiechaniaal or casual ffianner. Classafication ntade by a body of experLs after fuff stucly ancl analysjs of t age 22 23 the work should not be dlstu t/hich lndicate the classl ii'a has -e;rir;in State 'rl'it"been exartined iLrl'. o anv dlrection s ha\,e lo es reasonabfe basis to treat t Lhe clai is issued bv the court' anl ArtTcle 14 of the Canstitution'" 31. shvan 111 Babu vei:na was simifar Lc Lhe Pharmacists In Ehe saad case the Thrrd Pay commission placed tu'o scale Gra.i'r - B inLo two caLeqories and prescrlbing of pai, ll ) r"ar :uily presenL qualiilcalion qualifieC plrarmacisL who possess Lhe menLioned under the Act al]d (i1) For unquallfied r-he AcL PharnacisLs, those covered by cLause (d) of secLicn 31 of Lhe The sald r:ecommendaLlon ''as given elfect from 1 1 1973 In iL r'Jas .rrqed on behalf of Lhe peEitioners EhaL based for equal eoual paY of princrple pay scaLe ol Rs.330 550 which v'as In the sald case after of pay [o the oEher lhaimacists naki.-q 1,he abovE said observation Lhis Court furLher helduere entiLled !o Lhe "70, In tlte facLs of presert case there is Do scope far reference to the quaTifications 1n the tlecislon of the respondents to lnplement tlr'o scales of pay for two of Pharmacists Grade B. It does nat vioLate calegortes "rf tt.r /rroI'l sions of thP Co/lstl flrfion calTinq for 7,t1 interference bY this CoLlr t Pharnacists t/ith . Paqe 23 24 Nere11. Al,thoullh we have helL! that the petltioners of terns in iititl"d oily to the pay scafe of Rs 330-480 f w'e the reconneidations of the Third Pay connission ye-ars,. January 1, 1g73 and onfy after the period of i0 thev b;cane entitled ta the pay scafe of Rs 33A 560 but as'they have received thc scaJe of Rs 33A-560 since 1973 due to no fault of theirs and that scale rs being reduced in the year 7gB4 n/ith effect frant January 1, 7g73, it sta onl-y be just and proper not to recover any excess anount trhirh has afready been pald to then' we direct it';t no steps should be taken to Accardingfy, -or to adjust any excess afiount patd to the Tecouer petitioners due to the faul't of the respondents, the petitioners being in no way respotlsible for the sane " 32 TrL view of Ehe lindinqs recorded dbove lre hold that Data EnLry operar,ors Grade A are noL enlitled lor Scale of pay of Rs 1350 2200 ti e-f 1-1 1986 or lhareafLer merely on the basis of Lhear guaLil:Lc.Lt i,rns .rr for Lhe fact that Lhey hawe complet'd Lheir period of requisiLe service I4e furlher hold thaL any decisiolr renderef by any Tribunal or arll' High CourL conLrary Lo FLriLher in view .rf Ehe reasons and our decision frndrnqs recorde.l above while e.1 iLle.i Lo Ehe lrenef the High aourt, lij we hol.l EhaE the resPondentss are not ii as they sought fo]: before the Tribunal or the impugned or.ders passed bv the CAT RFr'hes and the High Courts in fav'Jur. of the respondencs beiitg i]]ega] are 3l The appeals are allowed ,J ( SI,DHANSU JYOTI HUKHOPADHAYA) Page 24 25 (PRAFULI,A NEl,f DELEI; DECEI,GIER 09, c. . PAN") 2At4. PaEa 25 ..T.