GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
S.No. PC-VI/ 371No. PC-VI/2014/MISC/04
New Delhi, dated 24.10.2016The General Manager/ CAOs,
All Zonal Railways/ Production Units
(As per mailing list)
Sub: Sharing of judgement - Judgement dated 09.09.2016 of CAT / Patna Bench in OA. No. 441/2014 (Dharmendra Singh & Ors Vs UoI Ors) on the issue of fixation of pay with reference to higher pre-revised pay scales of the upgraded/ merged scales w.e.f the date of promotion.
A number of court cases have been filed by the employees viz. Section Officer (A)/ Sr. Section Officer (A) etc. (in the pro-revised scales ofRs. 6500-10500/ 7450-11500) of various Railways before various benches of Hon‘ble Central Administrative Tribunal seeking fixation of pay in the revised pay structure of grade pay of Rs. 4800/- based on upgraded pay scale in pre-rcvised terms viz. Rs. 7500-12000 from the date of their promotion. Similarly, some employees of certain other categories in scale Rs. 650040500 have filed cases for fixation in revised pay structure of l’B-Z GP Rs. 4600 based on fixation table of pre-revised scale Rs. 7450-11500. The issue has been gone into the merits by CAT/Patna vide their judgement dated 09.09.2016 in O.A. No. 441/2014 (Dharmendra Singh & Ors Vs Uo1 & Ors). Hon’ble Tribunal has dismissed above oA vide orders dated 09.09.2016 (copy
enclosed) holding as follows:-
“43. As we have stated earlier, the claim of the applicants is not tenable as per the rules. This Bench in GA No. 442/2014 did not examine the matter independently. Rather, the direction was to extend the benefit of the judgement of Allahabad Bench subject to the outcome of the SLP. The Allahabad Bench judgement has already been examined in detail by the Principal Bench and the Full Bench and found not acceptable. We have also examined the Rules in detail and given our conclusions
44. On detailed examination, we have come to the conclusion that the applicants’ prayer is not acceptable. All these reasonings which we have given in detail in this order and our independent examination were not available before the Hon 'ble Patna High Court. It also appears that the judgements of the Principal Bench and the Full Bench of the Tribunal referred to above were not before the Hon 'ble Patna High Court.
45. Accordingly we find no merit in the OA. The OA is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs."
2. The Railways may bring the above position to the notice of Railway Advocate contesting such other cases and take necessary action to file a copy of above judgement before the respective Tribunals.
3. Receipt of this letter may please be acknowledged.
DA. As above
Jt. Director, Pay Commission
Read at http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/pay_comm/PC6/2016/PC_VI_371_281016.pdf