The A.P. Cooperative Banks ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2465 AP

          HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI

                                AND

           HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

                     W.A.No. 404 OF 2020
             (Taken up through video conferencing)

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)

      Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant-Andhra

Pradesh Cooperative Banks Association submits that his client was

unrepresented before the learned single judge. As a consequence,

the learned single judge came to an incorrect finding that there was

anomaly in the fitment of proposed scale of pay in "21 stages" vis-

à-vis existing scale of pay of 25 stages for the cadre of Assistant

Managers. Hence, the direction of the learned single judge based

on such erroneous conclusion is required to be set aside.


2.    Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 to 7-writ

petitioners submits that the change in the proposed scale of pay to

21 stages from the existing scale of pay to 25 stages, however,

requires to be read in the light of the second paragraph of Clause

(2) of the memorandum of agreement which inter alia provides for

stepping up the basic pay of a senior in the event his junior in the

same cadre is drawing higher pay. It is his contention that the writ

petitioners are, in fact, suffering due to the change in the pay scale

and drawing less salary in the same cadre vis-à-vis the juniors.


3.    We have considered the materials on record.
                                  2



4.   By memorandum of agreement dated 22-04-2016, which was

entered into on behalf of the appellant and respondent No. 2 on the

one hand and the workmen association on the other hand under

Section 18 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the existing

scales of pay with regard to various cadres were revised in terms of

the said agreement on and from 01-12-2012. Category IV related

to the cadre of Assistant Managers and Chart 3 appended to the

said agreement sets out the fitment in proposed scale of pay vis-à-

vis existing scale. Perusal of Chart 3 would show that the existing

scale of pay provided 25 stages whereas fitment in the proposed

scale of pay is in 21 stages. On such premise, the learned single

judge directed consideration of the fitment chart afresh. From a

reading of the agreement including Chart 3 thereof, we are of the

view it was a conscious decision of the stakeholders, namely; the

management as well as the workers' union, to alter the fitment

scale of pay for the cadre of Assistant Managers from 25 stages to

21 stages with three stagnation increments biannually after

reaching maximum in the scale. Decision to alter stages in the

proposed scale vis-à-vis the existing scale is not unique to the

cadre of Assistant Managers but also is applicable to other

categories of employees, namely; Category VI - Sub-Staff (Drivers,

Records    Assistants,   Daffedars   and   Messengers      including

Watchmen); Category III - Managers; and Category II - Assistant

General Managers.        In view of such fact, no case for

reconsideration of the fitment of scale in 25 stages is made out.

However, Mr. K.Ramalingeswara Rao, learned counsel appearing
                                       3



for the writ petitioners, submits that their grievance relates to

breach of second paragraph of Clause (2) of the agreement. Due

to the fitment in the proposed scale of pay, they are drawing less

salary than their juniors in the same cadre.              Clause (2) of

paragraph No. 2 of the agreement reads as follows:


      "After fitment as above, if the basic pay of any employee either

      immediately or after promotion of his/her junior to higher cadre is

      less than his/her junior, who is drawing same basic pay or less

      than his/her basic pay in the lower post, the basic pay of the

      senior in the higher post shall be stepped up by advancing his/her

      increment/increments     with       effect   from   the   date   of

      promotion/increments month of the junior.           Further annual

      increment shall accrue every year from the date of such stepping

      up."


The said paragraph has been incorporated in the memorandum to

correct any pay anomaly due to the fitment in various stages

resulting in a junior drawing a higher salary than a senior in the

same scale of pay.      However, no material is placed in the writ

petition to show whether any junior is drawing higher salary than

the writ petitioners.


5.    Under such circumstances, while setting the order passed by

the learned single judge, we are inclined to give an opportunity to

the writ petitioners to file proper representation disclosing

appropriate data relating to any junior drawing higher salary than

them in the same scale of pay in breach of Clause (2) of paragraph
                                        4



No. 2 of the agreement dated 22-04-2016 and in the event any

such representation is made by the writ petitioners within two

weeks from date, the appellant shall consider the same and pass

appropriate orders within four weeks from the date of such

representation and the decision, so taken, shall be communicated

to the writ petitioners.


6.    The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly.                   Pending

miscellaneous     applications,   if       any,   shall   stand   closed   in

consequence. No order as costs.


                                                  _____________________
                                                  JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.

___________________ K.SURESH REDDY, J. Date: 19-07-2021, JSK

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI

AND

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

W.A.No. 404 OF 2020 (Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by Hon'ble Sri Justice Joymalya Bagchi)

DATE: 19TH JULY, 2021

JSK