UNION OF INDIA Vs. P SHANMUGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 10 July, 2009 in O.A.No.510 of 2008 directing the petitioners to re-fix the retirement benefits of the first respondent and to refund the amount recovered from him, is the subject matter of this writ petition.

(2.) THE first respondent was appointed as Group-D employee in the office of Director, Foreign Post at Chennai. He was granted time bound promotion on 29 March, 1984 and as Biennial Cadre Review in Group-D on 1 July, 1994. As per the prevailing regulations, Group - D employees, who have been promoted to Biennial Cadre Review has to opt either to retire on reaching the age of 60 years and draw pay in the scale of Rs. 825-1200 or to retire at the age of 58 years and draw pay in the scale of Rs.950-1400. THE first respondent exercised his option to retire at the age of 60 years and he was allowed to draw pay in the scale of Rs.825-1200 on his promotion to Biennial Cadre Review in Group D. THE pay of the first respondent was fixed on 1 January, 1996 at Rs.3,450/- in the scale of Rs.2750 - 4440 under CCS (RP) Rules, 1996. Subsequently, his pay was stepped up from Rs.3,660/- to Rs.3,800/- in the scale of Rs.3050 - 4590 on par with his junior S. Umapathy, who was promoted as Biennial Cadre Review with effect from 1.1.1999.

(3.) THE Central Administrative Tribunal considered the issue in the light of the earlier proceedings in O.A.No.69 of 2008. THE issue involved in the said application was also revision of pay scale consequent to the increase of retirement age to 60 years. THE action taken by the department to re-fix the pay scale on the basis of the circular issued by the postal department was quashed in the said original application with a direction to restore the pay scale at Rs.3050-4590 with effect from 1 January, 1999. According to the Tribunal, the issue involved in the subject case was clearly covered by the earlier order. Accordingly, the original application was allowed. THE petitioners were directed to refund the amount already recovered from the first respondent, with a further direction to re-fix his retirement benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It is the said order which is challenged in this writ petition. SUBMISSIONS:-