GENERAL MANAGER DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS Vs. M JAYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ petitions are directed against the common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai in O. A. No. 542 of 2001 and a batch of cases, directing to consider stepping up of pay of the applicants/first respondent in these writ petitions on par with their juniors with effect from the date of their regular promotion.

(2.) THE case of the applicants in the Original Applications/the first respondent herein is that the applicants were initially appointed as Telephone Operators (Tos for short) and later promoted as Senior Telecom Operating Assistants (Sr. TOSs for short) on an adhoc basis and as on date they are working as such. Some of the officials were given officiating arrangement in the cadre of Sr. TOAs and this has enabled such persons to draw higher pay in the officiating post. However, when regular promotions to the post of Sr. TOA were made, it is seen that the juniors to the applicants in all these Original Applications have been given a higher pay by taking into account their pay drawn in the officiating capacity. Aggrieved by the said action of the official respondents, the applicants made several representations for redressal of their grievances. When their representations were not considered, they were constrained to approach the Tribunal and file the Original applications for stepping up of their pay on par with their juniors.

(3.) THE above said prayer was resisted by the respondents/the petitioners herein, contending that the department was upgrading the technology in matters relating to telecom. In order to meet the new requirements, the employees who had working knowledge of higher technology were made to work in officiating capacity arrangement as Sr. TOAs. Under these circumstances, irrespective of seniority of the employees, whoever was working in the new technology area were given officiating position as Sr. TOA. According to the official respondents, this process has been going on since 1993. They further contended that when regular DPC meetings were held to make promotion to the post of Sr. TOAs, all the applicants along with others were promoted in accordance with the Rules. They further submitted that since some juniors had already worked in the officiating position, they naturally had gained advantage over their seniors in the matter of pay fixation and in that context, the juniors were given higher pay fixation than seniors, viz. , the applicants in the Original applications. The official respondents had placed reliance on the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal rendered in O. A. No. 26 of 1999 on 18. 9. 2000, which was dismissed by the Tribunal.