UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER, EAST COAST RAILWAY, BHUBANESWAR Vs. SUDHANSU MOHAN KANUNGO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Union of India represented through the General Manager, East Coast Railway being aggrieved with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack dated 6.1.2011 passed in O.A. No.597 of 2010 have filed this writ petition praying therein for quashing of the impugned order at Annexure -4.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that the opposite party while working as Motor Mechanic Grade -III was granted the first financial up -gradation on 6.5.2004 under Assured Carrier Progression Scheme with effect from 3.9.2003 in the pay scale of Rs.4000/ -Rs.6000/ -with grade pay of Rs.2400/ -which is applicable to Grade -II. Such financial up -gradation was extended to the opposite party as he had rendered service in a particular post for ten to twelve years without any promotion/Carrier Progression. After implementation of the 6th Pay Commission, the payment of incentive bonus was introduced according to Railway Boards letter dated 29.10.2009 which provided for applicability of designation and pay range for the purpose of calculation of incentive bonus. According to the petitioners since the opposite party after grant of ACP was getting Rs.2400/ -grade pay the same was taken into account as bonus factor though in fact the opposite party was working in a Grade -III post. Subsequently, the Railway Board issued clarification on 23.3.2010 to the effect that incentive bonus payment should be decided on the post/ designation held by the employee and the hourly rate/bonus factor corresponding to that post/designation. In view of such clarification issued since the opposite party was holding the post and designation pertaining to Grade -III the grade pay of Rs.1900/ -assigned to Grade -III post was taken into consideration for calculation of incentive bonus and the excess bonus already paid to the opposite party of grade pay of Rs.2400/ -was ordered to be recovered. Challenging such decision of the present petitioners the opposite party approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 597 of 2010 and the Tribunal after hearing the respective parties passed the impugned order holding that the decision of reduction of payment of incentive on the grade pay of Rs.1900/ -is not sustainable being not in consonance with the instruction of the Railway Board dated 9.7.2004 (Annexure -A/11). It was further directed that the present opposite party is entitled to incentive on the grade pay of Rs.2400/ -and also a direction was issued that if any deduction made on the strength of a decision to pay the incentive on the grade pay of Rs.1900/ -, the same shall be refunded forthwith but not later than 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. The said order of the Tribunal is under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) MR . Misra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also contended that incentive bonus is granted to encourage production but since the opposite party belong to Technical Grade -III and assigned to do a particular job, he is not entitled to any incentive bonus. Accordingly, grant of incentive has to be taken on the basis of grade pay assigned to Grade -III post but the Tribunal without considering such a vital aspect passed the impugned order which is vulnerable and accordingly to be quashed.