SUPHAL CHANDRA MONDAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was working in the Fire Wing of RPF prior to 2006. Petitioner no.1 completed twenty-four years service in RPF on October 1, 1999 and thus became entitled to at least two ACP benefits in lieu of promotion, if not already granted. Others completed the said period subsequently. On September 6, 2006 the Fire Wing of RPF was permanently closed and the staff working therein were absorbed in other Railways including Metro Railway. He subsequently got promotion in the post of Leading Fireman having the scale of Rs.3200/- - 4900/-. In 2006 Metro Railway absorbed him on the option being exercised by him as Fireman. The petitioner no.1 retired on superannuation with effect from December 31, 2010. The petitioners made a grievance that they were not given the second ACP benefit after completion of twenty-four years service in RPF appropriately. The petitioners claimed, they should have been awarded the scale of Rs.5500/- - 9000/- as higher scale in the next post of Operation staff in Metro Railway.

(2.) In the backdrop as above, petitioners approached the Tribunal by filing O.A. No.734 of 2005. The Tribunal disposed of the said application on April 5, 2006. Tribunal passed an order directing the respondent to complete all formalities in connection with grant of second financial upgradation/ACP benefit. The authority did not act upon the said order resulting in a contempt proceeding being brought before the Tribunal. The authority, subsequently, asked the petitioners to appear for a Written Test on April 7, 2007 for extension of the second ACP benefit in the pay scale of Rs.4000/- - 6000/-. Petitioners lodged their protest on two counts

(3.) They approached the Tribunal again by filing O.A. No.270 of 2007. The respondent authority resisted the same by contending that they were given appropriate scale of Rs.4000/- - 6000/- applicable to Artisan category as they were closed to the same. The petitioners contended, they were fire fighting operational staff and could not be equated with Artisan who were entrusted with different nature of work to be performed. The Tribunal disposed of the application vide judgment and order dated March 18, 2011 by observing that the said application lacked merit. The authority already offered them the second ACP benefit. The applicants refused to appear at the Trade Test to qualify for the same. The Tribunal directed the authority to give them another opportunity to appear at the test. Being aggrieved, the petitioners approached us by filing the instant application that was heard by us on the above mentioned dates.