DHARAM PAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 23.03.2000 (annexure P-7) passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh, whereby an Original Application filed by the petitioner claiming same pay scale as that of Assistants working in the Head Office was declined. The petitioner is an Assistant working in Census Department i.e. Field Office. The petitioner is claiming parity with the pay scale of Assistants working in the Central Secretariat i.e. Head Office w.e.f. 01.01.1986 and 01.01.1996.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that IIIrd Pay Commission recommended pay scale of Rs. 425-700 to the post of Assistant of the Field Office, which was revised to Rs. 1400-2300 by the IVth Pay Commission. The Vth Pay Commission recommended pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000, whereas the Assistants working in the Central Secretariat i.e. Head Office are in the pay scale of Rs. 425-800 in terms of the recommendations of the IIIrd Pay Commission, Rs. 1400-2600 in pursuance of the recommendations of the IVth Pay Commission and Rs. 5500-9000 in pursuance of the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission. It is the case of the petitioner that since the Assistants in the Field Office and the Head Office discharge similar duties and responsibilities as well as appointed on the basis of similar qualifications, therefore, the difference in the pay scale is arbitrary and discriminatory.

(3.) The learned Tribunal has found that the different pay scale were provided on the implementation of the recommendations of the IIIrd Pay Commission. But, the petitioner has approached the Tribunal after the implementation of the report of the Vth Pay Commission on the ground that the difference in the pay case has widened. The Tribunal, thus, found that the petitioners have claimed pay scale after almost 13 years from 1.01.1986 or 9 years of grant of such pay scale and that such claim is highly belated. The Tribunal further found that the principles to work out separate pay scales for the Assistants of the Field Office and of the Head Office have been mentioned in the recommendations and relate not only to the duties and responsibilities, but even the mode of recruitment and the educational qualifications. It has been further found that the petitioners deal with routine matters, whereas Assistants in the Central Secretariat Service are required to deal with complex questions which involve decision in policy matters. Such Assistants are required to put up their papers before higher authorities. The Assistants in Subordinate offices are required to implement the policy decisions, whereas Assistants in the Head Offices are the part of decision making process. There is direct recruitment to the Assistants in the Central Civil Secretariat upto 50% of the posts with minimum educational qualification as Graduate, whereas for similar posts in Subordinate Offices the candidates are promoted from the posts of UDCs after 5 years of service.