High Court of TripuraWP(C)/338/2011allowed

Sibendra Sarkar, Retd.Accountant,S.C.Welfare Directorate v. Union Of India And 5 ORS.

2015-07-28Hon'Ble Mr. Justice S. Talapatra19 pages

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFTRIPURA AGARTALA W.P.(C)No.338of2011& W.P.(C)No.339of2011 InW.P.(C)No.338of2011 Petitioner: ShriSibendraSarkar,

# $ !% &'(())* ByAdvocate: + ,

-Versus- Respondent: 1. TheUnionofIndia, - -.

/ 01$

$ !% #'(())2 2. TheAccountantGeneral(A&E), $

$ !% &'(())2 3. ThePrincipalSecretary, / , 3

$ 4

3 , 5 36

$ !% &'(())2 4. ThePrincipalSecretary, / , 3 $ $- 3 , 5 36

$ !% &'(())2 5. TheDirector, $- 3 / , 3 $ !

$ !% &'(())2 6 TheTreasuryOfficer, $ .

7 !" $ !% # '(())7 ByAdvocate: +

/ +8+

InW.P.(C)No.339of2011 Petitioner: Smt.MamataDebbarma(Chowdhury), 5

5 . , &

$ !% & '((7)9 ByAdvocate: + ,

-Versus- Respondent: 1. TheUnionofIndia, 2. TheAccountantGeneral(A&E), $

$ !% &'(())2 3. ThePrincipalSecretary, / , 3

$ 4

3 , 5 36

$ !% &'(())2 4. ThePrincipalSecretary, / , 3 $ $- 3 , 5 36

$ !% &'(())2

5. TheDirector, $- 3 / , 3 $ !

$ !% &'(())2 6. TheTreasuryOfficer, $ .

7 !" $ !% # '(())7 ByAdvocate: +

/ +8+

BEFORE THEHON'BLEMR.JUSTICES.TALAPATRA :7:)'9)7; ,. :28.07.2015 3 0" : Yes No √ JUDGMENT&ORDER 3

< ,

5 5 5 5

- 3 4

3 +3

47(7&4% /=>* 9*)>7(>2

6 &; 5

[2] $ 3 . 3% ?

3 -

3)')>7(>'

5 .

? 4 3

6 &99 5

5 -

" $- 3

5 , 5 . . 3

3 7()*7('; *7)*7(';

. 5

5 ,

)')>7(>'

. 3

@ Name of the petitioners and their juniors in the grade of UDC Payon07.08.1987on whichdaythejuniors were appointed to UDC A .

5 . B

!**> 9)77C Date of appointment in the grade ofUDC 7:)*7(>) '';=& -

! **( 9)77C 72)'7(>7 '';=& 3 -

)')>7(>' >9;=&

)')>7(>' >9;=& [3] %

3 -

5 . . 3 7)=& ,

5 .5 A- 9:)&::)=&5 3 9*)*7(';

5 A .

, - .

5 ?3 .5

- - ,$ 3 , .

,& D&,

49' . 3 33

47(7&4% /=>* 9*)>7(>2

6 &; 5

4 33

@ MEMORANDUM "Cases are being referred to the Finance Department for stepping up of pay where a senior Government servant who was promoted to a higher post prior to 01.01.1982i.e.thedatefromwhichtheState Government pay scales were revised draws less pay in the revised scale than his junior whowaspromotedsubsequentlytoahigher identicalpostafter01.01.82. 2. TheGovernorhasbeenpleasedtodecide that in order to remove the aforesaid anomaly the Government of India decision contained in the ministry of Finance MemorandumNo.F.1(35)FEF111(A)/74dated 18.07.1974shallstandadoptedbytheState Govt. with effect from 1st January, 1982.

AccordinglythepayofaGovernmentservant intherevisedscaleinthehigherpostshould be stepped up to a figure equal to the pay fixed for the junior Government servant in theidenticalhigherpostonhispromotionon or after01.01.1982. Thesteppingupshould be done with effect from the date of promotionofthejuniorofficerandshouldbe subjecttothefollowingconditions: (a)Boththeseniorandthejuniorofficer shouldbelongtothesamecadreandthe posts to which they have been promoted shouldbeidenticalinthesamecadre.

(b) The unrevised and the revised scales of pay of the lower and the higher posts to which they were entitled to draw pay shouldbeidentical;and (c) The anomaly should be directly as resultoftheapplicationoftheprovisions ofF.R.22Cintherevisedscaleofpay.

increment granted to him, the provisions contained in this decision need not be invoked to step up the pay of the senior Governmentservant. 3. Theordersrevisingthepayofthe senior officer in accordance with the provisos of this decision should be issued under FRF27 and the next increment of the senior officer will bedrawnoncompletionoftherequired qualifying service with effect from the date ofsuchrefixationofpay." [4]

47(7& 4% /=>* )'7)7(>> 4

3 33

3 9*)>7(>'

4 -.

47(7& 4% /=>* )(797(>>

6 &' 5

- 5

-. 3 , 3

5 -3

3 9*)>7(>2

. 3 <

5 .3 $

!**> 9)77 E 5

**( 9)77

3 5 , 5

/ 0 1 $ 3

/ 01

" 38 $-5

- .

5 3 . -

/ 0 1

. .

. 3-

4 9' 4 6

@ WithreferencetosubjectcitedaboveIamto state that the pay regulation in respect of both employees of Tribal Welfare Department, Government of Tripura may kindly be reviewed. Their pay have been stepped up with Shri Chitta Ranjan Das, Retd.UDCwhoisjuniortothem.Thedetails of service in respect of above mentioned Governmentservantshavebeendescribedas under: (1)ShriChittaRanjanDas,Retd.UDC joinedinGovernmentserviceasPeon on 29.01.1954 and promoted as L.D. Clerk on 01.03.1973 and UDC on 07.08.1987. (2) Shri Bidyut Kr. Choudhury, Retd. Head Clerk joined in service as Peon on 07.09.1970 and promoted as L.D. Clerk on 18.02.1971 and UDC on 14.03.1980. (3) Shri Sibendra Sarkar, Retd. Accountant joined in service on L.

D. Clerkason29.01.1973andpromoted asUDCon16.07.1981. The pay of Shri Bidyut Kr. Choudhury and Shri Sibendra Sarkar has been stepped up with Shri Chitta Ranjan Das, UDC on 07.08.1987 saying that Shri Chitta Ranjan Das is junior to them. In fact due to larger period of service, pay of Shri Chitta Ranjan Daswasmoreandinthiscasestepupofpay as was done by the Tribal Welfare Departmentisnotcorrectedasperprovision of FRs. Accordingly the matter was referred to the Tribal Welfare Department vide this office letter No.

128/2004F05/596F98 dated 16.05.2005 (copyenclosed). In this connection reply furnished to this office vide letter No.7208F10/F.IF 477/TW/Estt/Vol. II/92 dated 01.07.2005 (copy enclosed) by the Joint Director, GovernmentofTripura, Agartalamayplease bereferredto. As narrated above, the Service Book of Shri Bidyut Kumar Choudhury, Retd. Head Clerk and Shri Sibendra Sarkar, Retd. Accountant andcopiesofordersforsteppingupofpayof those officials vide No.F.IF 454(L)/TW/Estt/(A)/17581F90 dated 26.05.1989 and F.IF 454(L)/TW/Estt/(A)/28707F717 dated 30.09.1989 are enclosed herewith for kind perusal.

It may be mentioned here that considering the hardship of the pensioner, pension and commutation in both the cases have been releasedonthebasisofpayasarrivedaton their date of retirement without taking into account the benefit of stepping up of pay pendingDCRG. In view of the above, it is requested to examine the case of the stepping up of pay and furnish the Government decision in this regard early so as to enable this office to finalisethepensioncase.

-. -

3 9*)>7(>>

- 5

. ? E < &6 3 3 $ )7)'9)); , -

6 &7: 5

" -.

)*)*9))> , *))*9))'

- , . A

! &9=! 9>=9)):=); . / , 3

$ 4

6 &72 5

3 "

/ 0 1 -

/ , 3 ,

9()77(;:

)7)*7('*

)')>7(>'5 .

5 . -. 5 -

**( 9)77 ,

)')(7(')

7>)97('7

7:)*7(>)

, A

9()77('*

72)'7(>7

/ 0 1

, 3

4 9'

. "

- 3

- 5 3 -.

/ 0 1 5

, 3 7*729)=& , -. .

5 .

!**(

9)77

3 7;9()(=& 3-

**> 9)77 5

-, 3

6 &7' 5

7;)29)77

6 & 7( 5

- !

**( 9)77 3

6 &7) 5

- -

< % .

/ 01$ -.

7;)29)77

6 &7( 5

- !

**( 9)77 5 4

3 5 -,

. - 6 5

, $ & 3

5 5 % 4

3 -.

9(799))2

6 &9) 5

- !

**( 9)77 5

, = E -,

3 -.

/ 015 1, -.

9()29)77

&97 5

- !

**( 9)77 3 ,

5 ,

- &

/ 0 1 5 3

@ As per observation of the AG, Tripura communicated vide letter No.PenF2/PRF 163/2004F05/596F98 dt. 25.05.2005 (AnnexureF6 to the DemandFnotice) it appears that the stepping up of pay as was done by the Tribal Welfare Department vide No.22420F516/F.1F72(E)/TW/ESTT/83 dt. 26.12.1983isnotcorrectsinceentryscaleof Shri Chitta Ranjan Das, Retd. UDC and date ofjoiningwasnotidenticalwithotherofficial towhom steppingupofpayhasbeen done, the anomaly arose due to larger length of service by Shri Chitta Ranjan Das under which no stepping up of pay is admissible under F.R. 27 Govt. of India decision there under.IthasalsobeeninformedbytheAG, Tripuravidememo.No.PenF2/PRF28/2004F 05/3755F56 dt. 03.03.2008 (AnnexureF8 of thedemandnotice)thatthepensioncasein respect of Shri Bidyut Kr. Choudhury, Retd.

Head Clerk and pension case in respect of ShriSibendraSarkar,Retd.Acctt.havebeen finalized with holding GPO for wrong fixation of pay. Pay of both the pensioners have been stepped up wrongly with Chitta Ranjan Das, Retd. UDC. In view of the decision of the Finance Department which intimatedthatinboththecasestherewillbe no stepping up of pay. However, as regards their pension case of Shri Sashi Kanti Deb Roy,Retd.HeadClerkitmaybestatedthatif the Department formally lodge complain against the case the same may be reviewed/reFcheckedatthisend. [6] % - 3

=/ - ,5

/ 0 1 $

-. 5

[7] $

9 -.

, . 5 . .

* 2-.

, ,

/ 0 1 $

, !

9()77(;:

5 A

)7)*7('*

)')>7(>'5 .

. , !

)')(7(')

7>)97('7

7:)*7(>)$. ! **( 9)77 -

, A

9()77('*

72)'7(>7$ 5

,-. ,

49' ,5 33

3 9*)>7(>2 [8] % .

, -

" $- 3

. -5

3 5 ,

[9] +

-3

3 %

3 ,

. +

-3 5 .

.5 ,55

/ 01$

, - - &

5 5

5 ,

[10] +8+

* 2 ,

3 9*)29)7; 4 3

5 6 >9;=&5)')>7(>'%

9()77(;: !

E 5 A

)7)*7('* 79;&*&7:)&:&7;2=&

)7)*7(': .5 79>=& 79;&7;2=&

3 3 5 *)9=& , 3

;F - ,-. $ / , 3 , ,!

. 7('; 3

5 . A

- "

)7)*7('* 6 3 3 -

5 79>=& %! 3 3 5 9(7;)=& 3 . 6 .

5 .

)7)*7('* 5 7*7=&

3 3 5 *):;)=&% , 3 %! $ / , 3 , , !

. 7(';

5 , 6

)7)*7(':$

3 % 5 ,

. A

5 ? .

. . 4 3 , .

5 -.

5 5 <

, ? [11] $5 <

@ (i) Whether the Finance Department Memorandumdated23.08.1986wouldcover suchsituationforgrantingsteppingupunder FR27?And (ii) Whether the special pay as granted to thejuniorofficersinthegradeofLDCwould disentitled the petitioners from getting at leastequalpayinthegradeofUDC? [12] 4 3 - 33

3 9*)>7(>2 3 ,

. - / , 3 ,

- <

/ , 3 ,

)7)77(>9 $ 5

5 3

- - -

5 . ,-

- 3 -

, . 5

5 .5 5 .

- .

4 99 ,

. "

6 3 - . , 5

/ , 3 ,

5 5 3 .

-., 6

3 ,

- ,

, 3 ,

. ,

- -, -.

3 9*)>7(>2

, -

5 , 5 ,

[13] 3.

, - ?3 % UnionofIndiaandothers vs. P. Jagdish and others, (1997) 3 SCC 176 6

56 3

@ "Under the provisions of fundamental Rules to remove the anomaly of a Government servant promoted or appointed to a higher post earlier drawing a lower rate of pay in that post than another Government servant juniortohiminthelowergradepromotedor appointed subsequently to the higher post, the principle of stepping up of the pay is applied. In such cases the pay of the senior officer in the higher post is required to be stepped up to a figure equal to the pay as fixed for the junior officer in that higher post.Thesteppingupisrequiredtobedone with effect from the date of promotion or appointment of the junior officer. On refixationofthepayoftheseniorofficerby applyingtheprincipleofsteppingupthenext incrementofthesaidofficerwouldbedrawn on completion of the requisite qualifying

service with effect from the date of the refixation of pay. This principle becomes applicable when the junior officer and the senior officer belong to the same category and the post from which they have been promoted and in the promoted cadre the junior officer on being promoted later than the senior officer gets a higher pay.

His beingtheprincipleofstepping upcontained intheFundamentalRulesandadmittedlythe respondents being seniors to several other Senior Clerks and the respondents having been promoted earlier than many of their juniorswhowerepromotedlatertothepost of Head Clerks, the principle of stepping up should be made applicable to the respondents with effect from the date their juniors in the erstwhile cadre of Senior Clerks get promoted to the cadre of Head Clerks and their pay was fixed at a higher slab than that of the respondent.

The stepping up should be done in such a way that the anomaly in juniors getting higher salary than the senior in the promoted category of Head Clerk would be removed and the pay of the seniors like the respondentswouldbesteppeduptoafigure equal to the pay as fixed for their junior officer in the higher post of Head Clerk. In facttheTribunalbytheimpugnedorderhas directedtoapplytheprincipleofsteppingup and we see no infirmity with the same direction subject to the aforesaid clarifications.

This principle of stepping up which we have upheld would prevent violation of equal pay for equal work but grant of consequential benefit of the differenceofsalarywouldnotbecorrectfor the reason that the respondents had not worked in the posts to which 35% special paywasattachedinthelowercadre." [Emphasissupplied] ?

3 3 ,

. , 3 ,

5 5 .

, 3 ,

3 ,

-< . - % < - <

. . - 5

- 6 .5 5 - 5 $ < 5

. <

5 "

-. .

6 3 5

< <

. , 5 3 6

. $ - 3

-5

3 . 3 5 . , -

.$ -

- A

- - , .

-3 -

. 3 5

.5 6

- 3 .

.3 ,

= <

? % UnionofIndiaandothersvs.P.Jagdishandothers, - -, @

"In fact the tribunal by the impugned order has directed to apply the principle of steppingupandweseenoinfirmitywiththe same direction subject to the aforesaid clarification. This principle of stepping up which we have upheld would prevent violation of equal pay for equal work but grant of consequential benefit of difference ofsalarywouldnotbecorrectforthereason thattherespondenthadnotworkinthepost towhich35%(sic)Rs.35asspecialpaywas attachedinthelowercadreG % 5

5 3 ,

[14] % UnionofIndiaandothersvs.P.Jagdish

5 .

, - 5

< .5

5 -.5

- <

/ 01$ 3 -. ,

, - 3 ,5 33

3 9*)>7(>2

- , .<

)')>7(>'

/ 0 1 $

9 5 E

.5 .

[15] % ,5 -,

- , !

.3 " !!" -.

9 !

.3 " !!"

< -.

- - 5

3 . % 3

, - 6

- 5 % -,

,. - 3

[16] % 5

5 5, -

JUDGE