T.J. BENJAMIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question arising herein is whether the respondent who was the applicant in the O.A. is entitled to anything more than that the Tribunal granted. Looking at the facts, we have to notice that the appellant who was engaged in the construction wing of the Railways as a casual labour, was regularised as a Gangman in Group D. However, he was continued in the construction wing in a Group C category with the post designation of Technical Mate.

(2.) When the applicant was regularised, his pay was reduced since he was a casual labourer in Group C regularised in a Group D post. The applicant approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal by Annexure A2 found that applicant is entitled to be protected his pay, which he was drawing as a casual labourer. The applicant continued in the post of Technical Mate on an ad hoc basis. While he was continuing so, he sought for ACP and MACP.

(3.) The respondent granted ACP and MACP by Annexure A1, in the Group D cadre. Such grant of ACP and MACP resulted in the pay entitled to him in the post of Technical Mate getting reduced. The appellant approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed that, after the ACP and MACT are granted, his pay has to be protected in his ad hoc post of Technical mate cadre.