SURENDER KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were working as Drivers Grade~c in the central Railways. They, along with Drivers grade-A and Drivers Grade-B, were entitled to be considered for selection to the higher post of Loco supervisors. The appellants as drivers, in addition to the scale of pay at Rs. 150-240, were also entitled to a running allowance of 30% of the salary which was liable to be added to their basic pay. They were promoted between the years 1970 and 1974 as Loco Supervisors in the Grade of Rs. 700-900.

(2.) The Railways accepted the recommendations of the IV Pay Commission with effect from 1.1. 1986. This increased the pay of the drivers as well as their running allowance, being 30% of their basic pay. Certain persons who were working as Drivers Grade-A were promoted as Loco Supervisors in the year 1986. The pay revision with effect from 1.1. 1986 not only increased their pay, but also the running allowance of those working as drivers as on that day, it being 30% of their increased basic pay. This resulted in the appellants getting a lesser pay as Loco Supervisors than those promoted after 1.1. 1986 since they did not have the advantage of the increased 30% addition in their running allowance and they had to be content with the 30% running allowance on their pay prior to the pay revision. Representations were made by the appellants pointing out that though they were promoted as Loco Supervisors earlier, they were getting lesser pay than those Drivers promoted subsequent to 1.1. 1986 and some of whom were their juniors. The General Manager took up their grievance and a circular was issued authorizing the stepping up of the pay of the appellants The pay was thus stepped up and arrears paid. But subsequently in the year 1992. the said circular was withdrawn on the basis that Codal Conditions had to be fulfilled for getting stepped up pay and they did not fulfil that condition. A person similarly situated as the appellants along with certain others, approached the Central Administrative tribunal. Jabalpur challenging the withdrawal of the stepped up pay. The Administrative Tribunal upheld their claim. The decision of the administrative Tribunal was challenged by the union of India in this Court. By Judgment dated 14.7.1997 reported as Union of India and others vs. O. P. Saxena (1997) 6 SCC 360, this Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Administrative Tribunal and dismissed the applications filed before the Administrative tribunal by persons similarly situated as the appellants

(3.) In these cases the Central Administrative tribunal, Bombay rejected the challenge of the appellants to the withdrawal of the stepped up pay. The appellants challenged the said decision before the High Court of Bombay. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions. It is the dismissal of those writ petitions that are challenged before us.