CHATTER SINGH Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 07.12.2011 in O.A. No.1043/2008, in which his complaint of not being given arrears for the period from 01.03.1993 to 08.08.1995, at par with the juniors in the Painter Grade -I, was rejected.

(2.) THE petitioner, at the relevant time, was working in the Indian Railways as Painter and the next grade for promotion from Grade -II was that of Grade -I. Sometime in 1993, cadre re -structuring took place in the Railways. Pursuant to this, the pay -scales and certain other terms and conditions of service were altered. However, the condition of Grade -II employees having to clear a trade test in order to secure the pay -scale attached to Grade -I survived. It is a matter of record that the petitioner's juniors ­ S/Shri Krishan Lal, Ram Swaroop, Hari Singh, Sri Niwas, Tejwant Singh, Subhash Chander and Surinder Kumar passed the trade test; their test result was declared on 08.08.1995. Consequently, an order fixing their pay -scale was issued on 19.10.1995. In this, those juniors were given the benefit of Grade -I along with arrears with effect from 01.03.1993. The petitioner felt aggrieved and approached the Tribunal on an earlier occasion by preferring OA No.1300/2006. He contended that though he was promoted in 1999 after a fresh trade test was held, he was denied the pay - scale and similar benefits which were extended to those juniors (in the higher pay -scale, i.e. Grade -I of Rs.4500 -7000 with effect from 01.03.1993). By the time the order was made by the CAT, the petitioner had retired. The CAT, relying upon an earlier Full Bench order, directed the Indian Railways to process the petitioner's claim as to his entitlement for arrears from 01.03.1993 to 16.09.1999. This order was challenged by the Railways in the Writ Petition W.P.(C) 11365/2009 (Union of India v. Chatter Singh) which was disposed of on 27.10.2010. This Court quashed the order of the CAT and directed it to decide the core issue as to whether the restructuring amounted to upgradation, the benefits of which were automatically available to all.

(3.) THE following finding of the CAT is relevant in this regard: -