UNION OF INDIA Vs. M SURYANARAYANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The Tribunal accepted the contention of the respondent and held that he is entitled to get his pay stepped up to be on par with that of P. Panjiara who was his junior. As regards Shah, the Tribunal held that the respondent had not made a representation to the Government and therefore, he could not seek stepping up of his pay on par with Shah. However, the respondent is satisfied with the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has limited the relief of stepping up for a period of three years prior to the filing of his application before it as a contention was raised that his application was filed four years after his junior P. Panjiara was promoted.

(3.) The judgment of the Tribunal is assailed by the appellant on the ground that principle of stepping up will not apply in the case where junior had been promoted earlier to a higher post on ad hoc basis and on account of such ad hoc promotion the junior got his pay fixed at a higher scale. In support of this contention reliance is placed by the appellant on a judgment of this Court in Union of India v. R. Swaminathan, (1997) 7 SCC 690 : (1997 AIR SCW 3659). A Bench of three Judges considered F.R. 22(1) and also the Government office memorandum dated 4-11-93 which sets out various instances where stepping up of pay cannot be done. The Bench pointed out that in that case the higher pay was fixed for the juniors not because of any promotion under FR 22 but because of an earlier ad hoc promotions given to the juniors for certain periods. The following observation of the Bench will be relevant (Paras 11 and 12 of AIR) :