Union of India & Ors. v. Har Sai

1. This petition has been filed, challenging the Order dated 21.03.2006 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 471/2004, titled Shri Har Sai v. Union of India & Ors., allowing the O.A filed by the respondent herein with the following directions:

2. As a brief background of the facts in which the present petition arises, the respondent herein was appointed as Statistical Assistant in the Bureau of Police Research & Development (‘BPRD’), Ministry of Home Affairs, on 06.02.1996, on a regular basis in the pay scale of Rs. 1400- 2300/-. In terms of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission (‘CPC’), the normal replacement scale for the said post was Rs. 4500-7000/-, and the further upgraded replacement pay scale was Rs. 5000-8000/-, as per paragraph 81.17 of the 5th CPC recommendation.

3. The respondent, aggrieved by the non-grant of the upgraded payscale and redesignation to Statistical Investigator Grade II, made representations in that regard. The representations of the respondent were rejected on the recommendations of the Department of Expenditure (Implementation Cell), Ministry of Finance, which stated that the department had not agreed to the upgradation of the pay scale of Statistical Assistant in the BPRD as the 5th CPC had confined the upgradation in pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 to only those posts of Junior Statistical Investigators and equivalent as were filled 100% by direct recruitment of graduates, and this condition was not satisfied in the case of the respondent, as the said post in the BPRD is filled primarily by transfer on deputation, failing which by direct recruitment.

4. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent filed the above O.A. before the learned Tribunal.

5. The learned Tribunal, in its Impugned Order, held that the recommendations of the 5th CPC did not confine the benefit of the upgraded pay scale only to those posts which were filled 100% by direct recruitment. We quote from the Impugned Order as under: “9, During the course of hearing of this matter, the case was re-listed 'for being spoken to' in order to confirm the actual date of appointment of the applicant and also for production of a copy of the recruitment rules, according to which, the post is to be filled by transfer on deputation failing which by direct recruitment and whether the applicant was appointed by transfer on deputation or otherwise. It was also desired to have the exact recommendation of the 5th CPC relied upon by the respondents for a decision in this matter. Accordingly, the respondents were granted leave to file an additional affidavit, which has been placed. A perusal of the same confirms that the applicant was appointed as Statistical Assistant in the BPRD w.e.f. 6.2.1996 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/following his selection by the Staff Selection Commission (SCC). A perusal of the recruitment rules shows that the method for recruitment is provided as transfer on deputation failing which by direct recruitment. The respondents have also annexed a copy of Paras 81.15, 81,16 and 81.17 of the recommendations of the 5th CPC. However, it has not been explained as to how from the contents of these recommendations, it could be concluded that only such of those posts of Junior Statistical Investigators and equivalent were recommended to be placed in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- as were filled 100% by direct recruitment of graduates. Para 81.15 is with regard to the upgradation of Superintendents in the Field Operations Division of NSSO. Para 81.16 is about upgradation of the Assistant Superintendents and Investigators in NSSO. Para 81.17 relates to the post of Junior and Senior Statistical Investigators, which is directly related to the case of the applicant. However, the contention of the respondents is not borne out by these 5th CPC recommendations which have been produced before us and there is no other material on record or to which our attention has been drawn that may justify their stand. Rather, the 5th CPC recommendations point towards only future induction accordingly, which also follows from Government OM dated 30.6.1998. Besides, It is not explained why the applicant’s selection by the SCC should not be regarded as direct recruitment. It is, however, noted that in the meanwhile the applicant had been promoted as Statistical Investigator Grade-IV In the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- and posted in the office of DGET, Shram Shakti Bhawan, New Delhi by order dated 01.3.2005 and relieved from BPRD.”

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on the Office Memorandum dated 30.06.1998, issued by the Ministry of Planning & Programme Implementation, Department of Statistics, which inter alia states as under:

Post Prerevised scale of pay (Rs.) Normal replacement scale of pay (Rs.) Upgraded replacement scale of pay (Rs.) Para 5 of 5th CPC’s report

1. Sudpt. FOD 1600- 5500-9000 6500-10500 81.15

2. A.S.. FOD 1600- 5000-8000 5500-9000 81.16

3. Invstr.. FOD 1400- 4500-7000 5000-8000 81.16

4. JS/Inv./Stat. Asstt. 1400- 4500-7000 5000-8000 81.17

5. Sr. Stat. Inv./Asstt. etc 1640- 5500-9000 6500-10500 81.17 (Emphasis supplied)

7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a reading of the above would show that the upgraded replacement pay-scale was available only where the Recruitment Rules provide only for direct recruitment.