G THULSI NATHAN INSPECTOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Mr. Nikhil Kerial, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. M.M.Bhatt, leaned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IN this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 10th September, 2003 passed in O.A.No. 255 of 2001 as well as the order dated 14th November, 2003 in Review Application No. 82 of 2003. The petitioner claimed for steeping up of pay vis-a-vis his junior Mr. Chandrashekharan in terms of Ministry of Finance, OM No. 7 (75)-E III/94 dated 1st December, 1994. The case of the petitioner in brief is that both he and his junior Shri M.Chandrasekharan joined the department as LDC with special pay (steno-typist). Both of them were promoted as UDC by the same order but he actually joined the promotion post after Shri Chandrashekharan as he was proceeding on leave. He was directly promoted as Tax Assistant in 1978 and thereafter as Head Clerk and then INspector. On the other hand, Shri Chandrasekharan was first selected as UDC with special pay and thereafter promoted as Tax Assistant in 1982. Mr. Chandrasekharan was also promoted as Head Clerk and INspector. The anomaly arose in 1982 as his special pay of Rs. 35/- was taken into account for fixation of pay as Head Clerk. Finance Ministry OM of 1994 allows notional stepping up from the date of anomaly with arrears from date of issue of the OM. The petitioner fulfils all the conditions of the said OM. He submitted a representation dated 14.2.2000 for removal of anomaly by stepping up of pay with effect from 9.8.1982. The zonal Accounts Officer advised ITO, TDSI and DDO (Administration) that proposal appears to be in order but the order should be issued by Head of Department quoting the 1994 OM.