Full Text
W.P.(C) 2100/2015 and CM No.3777/2015 (Stay)
Date of Decision: 15th November, 2016 DR. MOHD. AHMED ANSARI ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate.
Through Mr. D.S. Mahendru, Advocate.
JUDGMENT
1. The present writ petition impugns the order dated 17.08.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby the OA No. 1310/2010 filed by the petitioner- Dr. Mohd. Ahmed Ansari has been dismissed. The order dated 12.11.2014 dismissing the review application, RA No. 526/2011, is also challenged.
2. The petitioner was appointed in the respondent-Corporation to the post of Unani Compounder in the year 1979. The petitioner along with three others had filed the writ petition bearing W.P.(C) NO. 2016:DHC:7479-DB 2414/1998 challenging the amendment of the Recruitment Rules
1979. Under the pre amended rules, Compounders (Unani) could be promoted as Unani Hakim under 50% departmental promotion quota and the balance posts were to be filled by 50% direct recruitment. Post amendment vide notification dated 12.04.1981 the posts of Unani Hakim were to be filled only by way of direct recruitment. Essential educational qualification and stipulation of age limit of 30 years relaxable in the case of departmental candidates was prescribed.
3. The challenge to the amendment Rules failed, albeit some relief was granted to the petitioners vide a judgement dated 10.09.2007, the relevant portion of which reads as under:- “Learned counsel for the respondent argued that the petitioners could apply for the post of Unani Hakim in terms of the amended rules as departmental candidates. This is also not possible for the petitioners as the petitioners, with their long service, have crossed the age limit of 25 years prescribed under the rules and have, therefore, become ineligible. It would also be relevant to point out that 2 out of 4 petitioners had become eligible for promotion to the post of Unani Hakim before the promulgation of the 1984 Regulations. Therefore, their cases, in any event, are to be considered as per the 1979 Regulations. In respect of the other two petitioners, keeping in view the peculiar position, it would be appropriate for the respondents to consider giving relaxation in the rules so that they do not stagnate and retire on the same post on which they were appointed, without obtaining a single promotion in their entire service career. We may note that these petitioners are the only persons left in the service who are holding the post of Compounder and keeping view all these peculiarities, we are giving these directions. While doing so, we have also kept in mind that by interim orders passed in this petition, the respondents were directed not to fill found posts of Unani Hakims on the basis of the advertisement issued earlier. These orders are valid till date and, therefore, four posts of Unani Hakims are available with the respondents. The respondents are, therefore, directed to fill up these posts by considering the candidature of the petitioners. This exercise shall be done within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It the petitioners are considered fit for promotion, they shall be given notional promotions from the dates they became eligible. Their pay shall be fixed accordingly, However, they shall not be paid arrears of pay for the intervening period”.
4. As per the aforesaid direction, two petitioners who had become eligible for promotions as Unani Hakim prior to the notification dated 12.04.1981, were to be considered for promotion under the preamendment Rules. Two others including the petitioner herein, owing to the peculiar circumstances and as they were the only employees in the post of Compounder, directions were issued to the respondent- Corporation to grant relaxation and consider them for promotions so as to avoid stagnation. The petitioner was never promoted and had remained on the post of compounder since his appointment. Four vacancies of Unani Hakims were to be filled up by considering their candidature. The aforesaid exercise was to be carried out within two months from the date of receipt of the order passed and if the petitioners were found fit for promotion, they would be given notional promotions from the dates of their eligibility and their pay would be fixed accordingly. They would not be entitled for arrears of pay for the intervening period.
5. The direction regarding notional promotion was applicable to the two petitioners who were to be considered for promotion under the pre amended Rules. We would observe that the said direction was not applicable to the present petitioner, for first an order granting relaxation had to be passed and then he could have been promoted. We note that the petitioner herein did not meet the eligibility criteria under the pre amendment Regulations.
6. The petitioner was granted relaxation and promoted under the Recruitment Regulations 1984, vide order dated 14.6.2008. This order granted notional promotion to the petitioner as Unani Hakim (now redesignated post of Medical Officer) w.e.f 22.11.1984. Thereafter, the office order dated 07.11.2008 was passed by Respondent/MCD whereby, the pay of the petitioner was refixed at Rs 650 w.e.f. 22.11.1984 in the promotion scale of Rs 650-1,200; Rs 2275 + 600 NPA w.e.f 01.01.1986 in the pay scale of Rs 2200-4000; and Rs 10,200 w.e.f 1.01.1996 in the pay scale of Rs 8000-12,500.
7. Subsequently by another order dated 18.08.2009 the petitioner was granted promotion / placement as Senior Medical Officer in the pay scale of Rs 3,000-4,500 w.e.f. 15.12.1991, and revised to Rs 10,000-15,200 w.e.f. 01.01.1996.
8. The petitioner was further promoted as Chief Medical Officer in the pay scale of Rs 12,000-16,500 w.e.f. 25.01.1999, revised to Rs 27,210 with Rs 7,600 Grade Pay w.e.f 01.01.2006.
9. The petitioner retired from the post of Chief Medical Officer on 31.05.2008.
10. Similar orders granting notional promotions were also passed in the case of other Compounders (Unani) who were co-petitioners in the Writ Petition bearing W.P.(C) No.2414/1988.
11. The petitioner was however not satisfied with the promotion granted and the pay scale fixed. He filed an OA No.1310/2010 in April, 2010, with the following prayer:-
(i) Allow the Original Application.
(ii) Direct the respondent to consider the applicant for grant of Grade/scale of Rs.12000-16500 (pre-revised scale Rs. 3700-5000) after completion of two-year service in 1993; Specialist grade-I of Rs.14300-18300 [prerevised scale Rs.4500-5700] after completion of six year service in 1999; and Supertime scale of Rs.18400- 22400 (pre-revised scale Rs.5900-6700) in 2002 after completion of three year service in terms of the Office Order No. F.14/5/91/CED(M)/92 51/9800-08 dated 14.5.1992 issued by the Commissioner and if found fit to grant such Grade/scale with all consequential benefits including pay and allowances etc.
(iii) Direct the respondent to financial benefits of promotional post for the period October 2007 to 31.05.2008;
(iv) Grant any other relief, which this Hon‟ble Tribunal deems fits and proper in favour of the applicant.
(v) Costs of this OA may also be awarded in favour of the applicant and against the respondents.
12. The prayer clause (ii) quoted above reflects that the petitioner was seeking the scales of Rs.12000-16500 on completion of two years service in 1993 and Rs.14300-18300 on completion of six years of service in 1999 and Supertime scale of Rs.18400-22400 on completion of three years service in 2002, in terms of the Office Order No.F.14/5/91/CED(M)/92 51/9800-08 dated 14.5.1992 issued by the Commissioner. Another prayer made was that the petitioner should be granted arrears of pay at the relevant post for the period from October 2007 till 31st May, 2008 i.e. the date on which he had retired.
13. The respondent-Corporation in their reply had stated that the circular dated 14.05.1992 relied on by the petitioner was applicable to the Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy (ISMH) cadre and not to the cadre to which the petitioner belonged. The office order No.19(149)/CED- (M)/99/52/RK/62 dated 27.12.1999 was applicable to the petitioner. In fact this position was/is accepted by both the counsel for the petitioner and respondent-Corporation.
14. The said office order dated 27.12.1999 is placed on record and states that Medical Officers (Rs.8,000-13,500) were eligible for the first time bound promotion as Senior Medical Officers (Rs.10,000-15,200) on the completion of four years of regular service on seniority cum fitness criteria. Senior Medical Officers were eligible for second time bound promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer in the pay scale of Rs. 12,000-16,500 on the completion of six years of regular service as Senior Medical Officer or on the completion of 10 years of combined regular service as Medical officer of which at least two years should be at the post of Senior Medical Officer on seniority cum fitness criteria subject to benchmark of „Good‟. These time bond promotions had no linkage to vacancies or zone of selection. The placement of Chief Medical Officer in the grade of Rs 14,300-18,300 was on completion of 14 years of regular service in group A and with at least two „Very Good‟ assessments during the preceding 5 years. The petitioner had claimed that he was entitled to supertime scale of Rs 14,300-18,300 which was redesignated as Non-Functional Financial upgradation w.e.f. 2002. As noticed above, the Non-Functional Selection Grade of 14,300-18,300 was payable on satisfaction of the aforestated conditions. The petitioner‟s prayer and contention is that he should have been granted Non Functional Selection Grade of Rs 14,300-18,300.
15. The respondents along with counter affidavit have filed the minutes of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting held on 13.03.2009, wherein the case of the petitioner along with the other co-petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 2414/1998 was considered. The petitioner treated as working as a Medical Officer (Unani) in the year 1984. The DPC in terms of the circular dated 27.12.1999 held that the petitioner would be entitled to be promotion to the post of Senior Medical Officer on completion of four years regular service and the post of Chief Medical Officer in the pay scale of Rs.12000-16500 on completion of six years of regular service as Senior Medical Officer or on the completion of ten years of Combined regular service as Medical officer of which at least two years should be at the post of Senior Medical Officer. The relevant portion of the minutes reads as under:- "Since, the juniors of above mentioned Medical Officers were promoted in the scale of Rs.10,000-15,200 w.e.f. 5th December, 1991 and further promoted to the post of CMO in the scale of Rs.12,000-16,500 w.e.f. 25th January, 1999, the above mentioned Medical Officers (Unani) may be promoted/placed on next scales on notional basis as under:-
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Sl. Name of Date of Proposed date Proposed Remarks │ │ No. Medical notional of notional date of │ │ Officers1 promotion promotion/pla notional │ │ to the post cement in the promotio │ │ of scale of n/placem │ │ M.O(Unani Rs.10,000- ent │ │ ) 15,200 │ ├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ 1. Sh. Ashok 28.11.1980 05.12.1991 25.01.99 Expired │ │ Kumar on │ │ Vaid 23.02.07 │ │ 2. Sh. 17.12.1980 05.12.1991 25.01.99 Working │ │ Mahender │ │ Pal │ │ Sharma │ │ 3. Sh. Amir 22.11.1984 05.12.1991 25.01.99 Retd. pm │ │ Raza Zaidi Dec. │ │ 2004 │ │ 4. Sh. Mohd. 22.11.1984 05.12.1991 25.01.99 Retd. on │ │ Ahmed May, │ │ Ansari 2008 │ │ WP(C) No.2100/2015 Page 9 of 17 │ │ 2016:DHC:7479-DB │ │ No RDA report from Vigilance department and Currency of │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
7. In the rejoinder filed on behalf of the applicant, it is averred that even if it is taken as if the applicant is entitled to time bound promotion as per Tikku committee recommendations only up to the pay scale of Rs.4500-5700 (pre-revised) as per office order dated 27.12.1999, yet his pay has not been revised as per the said office order inasmuch as, the first time bound promotion from the level of Medical Officer (Rs. 8000-13500) to the level of Senior Medical Officer (Rs.10000-13500) to the level of Senior Medical Officer (Rs.1000-15200) is on completion of four years of regular service. The applicant appears to be asking for something to which he may not be entitled to at all. In our considered view, as per directions given by the Hon‟ble High Court, the applicant was entitled to one promotion, which would be in the post of Medical Officer (Unani). He was entitled to pay fixation on the said promotional post and pay fixation from time to time as per the enhancement made in his pay, be it by the respondents of their own or on recommendations of the Pay Commissions. He could not be entitled to pay scales meant to be given to posts higher than Medical Officer (Unani). The applicant would ask for the pay scale of Senior Medical Officer, and even above. It may be recalled that the applicant has been given promotional/placement scales as well but he is demanding the same from earlier dates as the Specialists may be entitled to by virtue of order dated 14.5.1992. In our considered view the applicant cannot be given the said benefit. As regards the claim of the applicant for actual payment after expiry of the period of two months within which the respondents were to pass orders and up to the time the order was actually passed, it is the case of the respondents that matter like this needs to be referred to many departments, and in the very nature of things, it takes some time before orders may be passed. We do not find any intentional delay in passing of the orders. The delay is explained and is only of few months.
8. Finding no merit in this Original Application, we dismiss the same, leaving, however, the parties to bear their own costs."
18. Learned counsel for the petitioner had argued that the Tribunal in the aforesaid reasoning had made out a distinct and different case and the petitioner‟s prayer that he should be granted non-functional selection grade or promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer in the pay-scale of Rs. 14300-18300 had to be rejected for extraneous and wrong reasons.
19. The factual and legal position emerging from the judgment dated 10.09.2007 in WP(C) No.2414/1998 has been elucidated and elaborately dealt with by the Tribunal in the aforequoted paragraphs. We respectfully agree with the said observations and findings of the Tribunal which are lucid and absolutely clear. We have already referred to the operative portion of the order of the High Court dated 10.9.2007 disposing of W.P. (C) NO. 2414/2008. The High Court was indulgent and had partly allowed the writ petition directing the respondent-Corporation to grant relaxation in the case of the petitioner, for the petitioner was not eligible for promotion under the amended rules. Under the pre-amended rules also, the petitioner had not qualified for promotion to the said post. The petitioner could have been promoted as Unani Hakim only after the respondent Corporation had granted relaxation, in terms of judgment dated 10.09.2007. The petitioner could not have been granted promotion as Unani Hakim prior to 10.9.2007 i.e. the date on which the writ petition was disposed of. The respondent Corporation was generous and bounteous in granting notional promotion to the petitioner as Unani Hakim with effect from 22.11.1984 and thereafter granting notional promotion or placement as Senior Medical Officer with effect from 15.12.1991 and then as Chief Medical Officer with effect from 25.1.1999. The petitioner was paid the salary of Chief Medical Officer computed after giving effect to the orders of notional promotion from the date of judgement till he retired on 31.5.2008. In terms of the aforesaid judgment dated 10.9.2007, the petitioner should have been promoted to the post of Unani Hakim. Obviously, further upgradation or placement as Senior Medical Officer or as Chief Medical Officer were not postulated. No such mandate and direction was issued.
20. The OA No.1310/2010 was founded and based upon the office order dated 14.5.1992. It is an accepted and admitted case of the parties that the said office order was/is not applicable to the petitioner and the office order dated 27.12.1999 was applicable. The petitioner, in these circumstances, should have amended the OA and made appropriate pleadings. It is apparent that without amendment of the pleadings, the matter was considered by the Tribunal in the light of the office order dated 27.12.1999. We may have remanded the case to the Tribunal for fresh decision for considering the effect of the office order dated 27.12.1999 and whether the petitioner would be entitled to the relief in terms of the said order, but are not inclined to take the said step, for the petitioner is certainly not entitled for the relief as claimed. In fact no relief under office order dated 27.12.1999 was admissible.
21. However, we would like to clarify that our observations or the order of the Tribunal would not confer any right/ground or constitute a cause of action to re-fix the petitioner‟s pension or recover arrears. This order would not affect the notional promotions granted to the petitioner to the post of Senior Medical Officer or Chief Medical Officer. The respondent- Corporation has not filed any writ petition before us, nor has it claimed that they had erred or by mistake the petitioner was granted notional promotions as Unani Hakim with effect from 22.11.1984, as Senior Medical Officer w.e.f. 15.12.1991 and as Chief Medical Officer w.e.f. 1st January, 2006.
22. Recording the above, we dismiss the present writ petition.
23. No Costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J. CHANDER SHEKHAR, J. NOVEMBER 15, 2016 b