UNION OF INDIA Vs. A ABDUL SALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Government of India is the petitioner. Aggrieved of the order passed by the tribunal, which was filed against the order for refixation of the salary of the first respondent, the said O.A.No:101 of 2001 was filed. THE tribunal had gone into the matter and not satisfied with the impugned order passed by the second respondent refixing his salary in the cadre of IAS non civil services is bad in law and therefore, allowed the OA and directed the writ petitioner to refer the matter to the Pay Anomalies Committee for its consideration and pass appropriate orders.

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows: (a) THE first respondent joined in the services of the State Government as Joint Commercial Tax Officer (Class I Post) in 1972 and subsequently promoted as Commercial Tax Officer in 1987. In March, 1997, the applicant was called for an interview for appointment to the Indian Administrative Services (IAS) by Selection and by order dated 19.5.1997 the second respondent appointed the applicant to officiate in a cadre post as Joint Commissioner of Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection. THE applicant joined the post on 21.5.1997. As per order dated 30.6.1997, the Central Government appointed the applicant as a member of I.A.S. under the I.A.S.(Appointment by Selection) Regulations, 1956. His probation was also declared. By order dated 27.6.1997, the State Government allowed the applicant to draw the last pay drawn by him pending fixation of his pay by the Central Government. THE applicant was allowed to draw Rs.5000/- as basic pay since he reached the maximum scale in his sale of pay Rs.3700-5000. THE applicant received a total emoluments of Rs.14,425/- as pay arrears with other allowances on the date of his appointment to the cadre post. On 3.12.1997, the Central Government fixed the pay of the applicant in the scale of pay of Rs.15,100-18,300 and his pay was fixed at the minimum of the scale of Rs.15,100/- with effect from 22.5.1997. In the meanwhile, the State Government revised the pay and the pay scale in which the applicant was working i.e. Rs.3700-5000 was revised to Rs.12,000-16,500 with effect from 1.1.1996. THE applicant also got the benefit of pay fixation given by the State Government. While so, as per the letter dated 25.11.1999, the applicant was informed that the Government of India is proposed to review the earlier pay fixation of the applicant in the I.A.S., consequent to the revision of pay scale of the State Government. THE applicant made his representation. But by the impugned order, the applicant's pay was fixed at Rs.13,575/- in the scale of pay of Rs.10,650-15,850. THErefore, the applicant filed the O.A., contending that once his initial pay was fixed as scale, it `is not open to the Government to review or revise the earlier order as per Rule 4(6) of the IAS (Pay) Rules, 1954. It is further contended that as per the Notification dated 22.10.1997 consequent to the implementation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission in the explanatory memorandum, it is declared by the Government that by giving retrospective effect to the implementation of the pay commission report no member of the I.A.S., is likely to be adversely affected. It is also alleged by him that if the revised pay fixation is effected, he will be put to monetary loss approximately about 15 lakhs and his pension will also affected. Further, it is contended that his juniors in the State service are getting a higher pay and specific instances also given that M/s. K. Raju and Appavoo are now working as Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in the pay scale of Rs.15,000-18,600/- whereas the applicant admittedly senior to them and has been promoted to I.A.S., is getting a lesser pay much less than his juniors. (b) In reply to the above contentions raised by the applicant, the Government/respondent No.2 has contended that initially his pay was fixed as a member I.A.S., Rules and provisionally fixed his scale to be reviewed or revised later. After revision of the pay scales of the Officers, who are promoted from the State non civil cadre the applicant's pay was fixed provisionally and after receiving the communication from the State Government with regard to the revision of State pay scales, the impugned order was passed which is in order and in accordance with law. It is specifically contended by the petitioner in the writ petition that that the selection grade is admissible to the officers of IAS on completion of 13 years service calculated from the year of allotment, for which the applicant was even otherwise not eligible, going by his seniority fixed in the IAS. Since such a fixation was only provisional, the higher pay was allowed till the time the State pay scales were subsequently revised. When the same happened and the State pay of the applicant was revised, it became necessary to refix his IAS pay on the basis of his reckonable revised State pay, which he was found to be drawing on the dates of his officiation in an IAS cadre post and appointment in the IAS cadre. Accordingly, the present pay scale was fixed. (c) In reply to the above said contentions, learned counsel for the respondent/applicant in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit has relied upon certain provisions of pay fixation laid down in the IAS (Pay) Rules, 1954 and the instructions issued thereunder which would be relevant to understand the issue. THE SCS and non-SCS officers appointed in the IAS get their pay fixed in the IAS pay-scales at the stage next above their State pay. While doing so, the reckonable state pay is the pay drawn by them in a substantive position. THE state pay-scales for this purpose should be the pay-scales which are either revised from the same date from when the IAS pay-scales are revised or are the first time pay revision after the date of revision of the IAS pay-scales. Such promoted officers remain on probation for a period of one year in the IAS and during the period, they are eligible for re-fixation of their IAS pay as and when any enhancement in their State Pay takes place. THE applicant's pay was fixed in the IAS strictly in the light of the above provisions. When the State pay-scales were subsequently revised from 1.1.1996, it however became necessary to refix the pay of the applicant which happened to be lower than what he was granted earlier.