Delhi High Court
Narinder Singh And Ors. vs University Of Delhi And Anr. on 28 August, 2015
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment reserved on August 19, 2015
Judgment delivered on August 28, 2015
+ W.P (C) Nos. 5096/2012 & 5099/2012
NARINDER SINGH AND ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anil Kaushik, Adv. with
Mr.Rajinder Singh, Mr. Rohit
Singh, Advs.
versus
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Adv. for
R1-DU
Mr. Ankur Chiiber, Adv. for
R2
&
PRAVEEN TANEJA & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Anil Kaushik, Adv. with
Mr.Rajinder Singh, Mr. Rohit
Singh, Advs.
Versus
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Adv. for
R1-DU
Mr. Ankur Chiiber, Adv. for
R2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO
V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.
1. These two writ petitions involve similar issue of grant of 2nd ACP
to the petitioners i.e. in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13,500/- with effect
from August 1, 1998 in respect of petitioners in W.P.(C) 5099/2012 and
with effect from April 9, 2004, October 7, 2004 & August 1, 2001
respectively, with regard to the petitioners in W.P.(C) 5096/2012.
2. In W.P.(C) 5099/2012, the petitioner No. 1 had joined Agricultural
Economic Research Centre (AERC, in short), Delhi University as
Technical Assistant on December 31, 1977 in the pay scale of Rs. 380-
560 whereas the petitioner No. 2 Santosh Kumari Maan, joined the same
post on August 6, 1977 in the same pay scale of Rs. 380-560.
3. The petitioners in W.P.(C) 5096/2012 joined the post of Technical
Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 on April 9, 1984 i.e. (Narinder
Singh, petitioner No. 1) October 7, 1983 (Balbir Singh, petitioner No.2)
and on May 21, 1981 (C.P.Sharma, petitioner No. 3) respectively.
4. The petitioners in W.P (C) 5099/2012 and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3
in W.P.(C) 5096/2012 have retired from service.
5. It is the case of the petitioners in both the writ petitions that at the
time of their joining, there was anomaly in the pay scale of Technical
Assistants (TAs) of the Delhi University and of AERC. The Technical
Assistants in Delhi University were getting higher pay scale of Rs. 425-
700. A Committee under the chairmanship of Dr.R.S.Gupta (Treasurer
of the Delhi University) was constituted by Vice-Chancellor of the Delhi
University, which in 1989, recommended, the anomaly be corrected and
as a consequence thereof, w.e.f. January 1, 1986, all posts of TAs in the
AERC were placed in a higher pay scale of Rs. 425-700 (revised Rs.
1400-2300) without any requirement of any additional qualification. In
other words, it is the case of the petitioners that this was not a
promotion/upgradation but only a rectification and en masse the pay
scale of all TAs in AERC was revised. The recommendation of Dr.
R.S.Gupta Committee was as under:
"Taking into consideration the comparable
designations and the qualifications, the Committee
recommends as follows:
1. That the Technical Assistants may be given the
revised scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2300 i.e., at par
with the Technical Assistant in the University
w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and that they may be placed in the
higher scale of pay of Rs. 1640-2900 under „One
Time Upward Movement Scheme‟ on the basis of
8 years completed services as Technical
Assistants".
6. Under the One Time Upward Movement (OTUM) Scheme of the
University of Delhi, the petitioners were entitled to movement to next
higher scale upon completion of 8 years service. Thus, the petitioner
Nos. 1 to 3 in W.P.(C) 5096/2012 were granted higher grade of Rs. 550-
900 (revise Rs. 1640-2900, further revised Rs. 5500-9000) under OTUM
w.e.f. April 9, 1992, October 7, 1991 and August 1, 1989 respectively,
whereas, the petitioners in W.P.(C) 5099/2012 were granted higher
grade under OTUM w.e.f. January 1, 1986 initially in the pay scale of
Rs. 425-700 and later after the Dr. Gupta Committee's recommendations
in the pay scale of Rs. 550-900.
7. The Government of India issued Office Memorandum dated
August 9, 1999, introducing Assured Career Progression Scheme, which
contemplated grant of financial upgradations on completion of 12 and 24
years of regular service.
8. It is the case of the petitioners that since the first upgradation was
granted upon completion of 8 years of service under OTUM Scheme on
the dates referred above, the 2nd upgradation under the ACP to those,
who received OTUM before April 8, 1998 was to be given on a further
completion of 12 years from the first financial upgradation as mentioned
in Delhi University's letter dated October 3, 2001. The petitioners also
referred to a clarification issued by DoPT that for cadres with only two
grades where there would be only one promotional avenue, the scale of
pay for the 2nd upgradation under the ACP Scheme, would be the same
as those applicable for similar posts in Ministry/Department/Cadre. The
petitioners also referred to the clarification issued by DoPT on February
10, 2000 and July 18, 2000 that the financial upgradation under the ACP
Scheme is to be allowed under the existing hierarchy as on August 9,
1999 or at the time of one becomes eligible, whichever is later. On
December 18, 2000, the University of Delhi accepted the implementation
of ACP scheme of the Govt. of India for its employees. On October 3,
2001, DoPT had issued clarification to the extent that, 'where all the
posts are placed in a higher scale of pay, without the requirement of any
new qualification for holding the post in the higher grade and without
involving any change in responsibilities and duties, such upward
movement would not be treated as a promotion/upgradation'. The
petitioners have given a reference to a Meeting of the Governing Body
dated November 10, 2004, wherein, it was recorded that Technical
Assistants are not entitled to 2nd upgradation as they have already availed
two financial benefits during their services. It was also decided in the
meeting that the AERC may re-examine the case with reference to
detailed clarifications issued by the Government of India, DoPT and take
up the matter with the Delhi University, if appropriate, again. The
petitioners have referred to a letter dated April 21, 2010 of the
respondent No. 1 written to the respondent No. 2, clarifying that the post
of Technical Assistant was the cadre post and since the issue of
upgradation has been pending since January 1998, early implementation
may be considered. A Sub-Committee was constituted by the Governing
Body of the respondent No. 2 wherein, a view was taken that since the
Technical Assistants of the AERC were granted parity with Technical
Assistants of Delhi University in the pay scale of Rs. 425-700 and that
thereafter, OTUM was granted to them in the pay scale of Rs.550-900
(pre-revised) (Rs.5500-9000 revised) and as they have already received
two financial upgradations, no further benefit is available to them under
Assured Career Progression Scheme. Representations were made by the
petitioners for reconsideration of the decision taken. The matter was
again referred to the Sub-Committee for re-consideration which rejected
the request of the petitioners.
9. The stand of the respondent No. 1 is that Technical Assistants
were originally appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 and on
completion of 8 years of service, were granted pay scale of Rs. 425-700
prior to Gupta Committee recommendation. Thus, it is their case that the
petitioners in W.P.(C) 5099/2012 were granted higher scale of Rs. 425-
700 with effect from January 1, 1986 on completion of 8 years as a One
Time Upward Movement. Dr. R.S. Gupta Committee's
recommendations became available only in 1990, which also
recommended the grant of pay scale of Rs. 425-700 with effect from
January 1, 1986. The respondent No. 1 has taken a stand that Dr. R.S.
Gupta Committee also recommended the pay scale of Rs. 425-700 w.e.f.
January 1, 1986 and not from the date of joining the Centre. It is also
their stand that the petitioners in W.P.(C) 5099/2012 were granted the
pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 w.e.f. January 1, 1986 under One Time
Upward Movement Scheme on completion of eight years of service.
10. The respondent No. 2, has in its counter affidavit stated that a
Committee was constituted by the Vice Chancellor under the
Chairmanship of Dr.R.S.Gupta and others to examine the pay scale of
the Technical Assistants. The Committee taking into consideration the
comparable designations and the qualifications recommended that the
petitioners may be given the revised scale of Rs. 425-700 at par with
Technical Assistants of Delhi University w.e.f. January 1, 1986 and that
they may be placed in the higher pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 under
OTUM Scheme on the basis of eight years of completed service as
Technical Assistant. It is also the stand of the respondent No. 2 in
W.P.(C) 5099/2012 that the Centre granted pay scale of Rs. 425-700 to
the petitioners in 1986 under OTUM on the basis of eight years of
completed service prior to the recommendations of Dr. R.S.Gupta
Committee's report, in 1990. Further, they were granted pay scale of Rs.
1640-2900 under OTUM from January 1, 1986 on the basis of the
recommendations of the Dr.R.S.Gupta Committee in 1991. It is also
averred that a 2nd Committee was constituted under Dr. G.S.Bhalla,
which on August 19, 1998 recommended that Technical Assistants of
AERC may be recognised as equivalent to Technical Assistant working
in the Department of University and be governed by the same Rules in
the matter of promotions and pay scale. It is their case that on the
examination of the official report, they have intimated the petitioners, the
Technical Assistants have already got two financial upgradations and
hence, they are not entitled to get any further upgradation in terms of the
ACP Scheme.
11. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have reiterated their
respective stand in the pleadings filed before this Court.
12. Learned counsel for the respondents have filed a compilation of
some documents on August 27, 2015, which relates to grant of One Time
Upward Movement and copies of service books showing certain entries
relating to the petitioners in W.P(C) 5099/2012 and also copies of
service books showing entries with respect to the petitioners in W.P (C)
5096/2012. The same have been taken on record.
13. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the issue which
would arise for consideration of this Court is whether grant of pay scale
of Rs. 425-700 w.e.f. January 1, 1986 is considered as a Financial
Upgradation, to be counted alongwith the OTUM granted on completion
of eight years of service in the pay scale of Rs. 550-900 (Revised-
Rs.1640-2900, further revised as Rs. 5500-9000) as having got two
financial upgradations to deny the benefit of 2nd ACP on completion of
24 years of service. Before I answer this question, there is no dispute on
the clarification issued by the DoPT (at Page 68 of the paper book), on
the point of doubt raised, which I reproduce as under:
S.No. Point of doubt Clarification
XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX
35. Whether Where all the posts are
placement/appointment placed in a higher scale of
in higher scales of pay pay, with or without a change
based on the in the designation; without
recommendations of the requirement of any new
Pay Commissions or qualification for holding the
Committees set up to post in the higher grade, not
rationalise the cadres is specified in the Recruitment
to be reckoned as Rules for the existing post and
promotion/financial without involving any change
upgradation and offset in responsibilities and duties,
against the two financial then placement of all the
upgradations applicable incumbents against such
under the ACP Scheme? upgraded posts is not be
treated as
promotion/upgradation.
Where, however,
rationalization/restructuring
involves creation of a number
of new hierarchial grades in
the rationalised set up and
some of the incumbents in the
pre-rationalised set up are
placed in the hierarchy of the
restructured set up in a grade
higher than the normal
corresponding level taking
into consideration their length
of service in existing pre-
structured/pre-rationalised
grade, then this will be taken
as promotion/upgradation.
If the
rationalised/restructured
grades required possession of
a specific nature of
qualification and experience,
not specified for the existing
posts in pre-rationalised set
up, and existing incumbents
rationalised scales/pre-
structured grades, who are in
possession of the required
qualification/experience are
placed directly in the
rationalised upgraded post.
Such promotion/upgradation
will also not be viewed as
promotion/upgradation.
However, if existing
incumbents in the pre-
rationalised grades who do
not possess the said
qualification/experience are
considered for placement in
the corresponding
rationalised grade only after
completion of specified length
of service in the existing
grade, then such a placement
will be taken as
promotion/upgradation.
Where placement in a higher
grade involves assumption of
higher responsibilities and
duties, then such upgradation
will be viewed as
promotion/upgradation.
Where only a part of the posts
are placed in a higher scale
and rest are retained in the
existing grade, thereby
involving redistribution of
posts, then it involves creation
of another grade in the
hierarchy requiring framing
of separate recruitment rules
for the upgraded posts.
Placement of existing
incumbents to the extent of
upgradations involved, in the
upgraded post will also be
treated as
promotion/upgradation and
offset against entitlements
under the ACPS.
For any doubts in this regard,
matter should be referred to
the Department of Personnel
and Training (Establishment
„D‟ Section) giving all
relevant details.
14. Keeping in view the aforesaid clarification, it is to be seen whether
there were two schemes for financial upgradation on completion of eight
years in the scale of Rs.425-700 (revised Rs.1400-2300) and Rs.550-900
(revised Rs.1640-2900). No doubt, the respondent No. 1 has said so in
para (2) of its reply at page 225 of W.P.(C) 5099/2012, which I
reproduce as under:
"2. The Centre awarded pay scale of Rs. 425-
700 (revised as Rs. 1400-2300) to petitioners in 1986
under one upward movement on the basis of eight
years completed service prior to recommendations of
Dr. R.S. Gupta Committee report in 1990. Further,
they were granted pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 under
one time upward movement from 01/01/1986 on the
basis of the recommendations of the Gupta Committee
in 1991".
15. I may note here, such a stand has not been taken by the respondent
No.2, in W.P.(C) 5096/2012.
16. Be that as it may, the respondents have placed before me a chart
giving the details of the pay scales as given to all the petitioners. The
same is reproduced for ready reference:
"Agricultural Economics Research Centre University of Delhi
University of Delhi
SN Name of the Employee Date of Joining Pay Scale Revised by Gupta Date of One Time Date of Retirement 3rd
Committee w.e.f. 1/1/1986 Upward Movement after Up-gradation
8 yrs, with Pay Scale of ACP
1 Mr. 6/8/1977 Rs.380- Rs.425-800 1/1/1986, Rs. 31/03/2009 01/09/
Santosh 560 w.e.f. 550-900, 2008*
Kumari Maan 1/1/1986 Revised as
(TA) Rs.5500-
V Pay
Commission
2 Ms. 31/12/1977 Rs.380 Rs.425-800 1/1/1986, Rs. 31/08/2012 01/09/
Praveen -560 w.e.f. 550-900, 2008*
Taneja 1/1/1986 Revised as
(TA) Rs.5500-
V Pay
Commission
3 Mr. 07/10/1983 Rs.380 Rs.425-800 07/10/1991, 30/06/2007 Not
Balbir Singh -560 w.e.f. Rs. 550-900, Granted
(TA) 1/1/1986 Revised as due to
Rs.5500- less than
9000 30 years
V Pay of
Commission service
4 Mr. 21/05/1981 Rs.380 Rs.425-800 01/08/1989, 30/04/2005 Not
C.P. -560 w.e.f. Rs. 550-900, Granted
Sharma 1/1/1986 Revised as due to
(TA) Rs.5500- less than
9000 30 years
V Pay of
Commission service
5 Mr. 09/04/1984 Rs.380 Rs.425-800 09/04/1992, 30/04/2019 Due
Narinder Singh -560 w.e.f. Rs. 550-900, since
(TA) 1/1/1986 Revised as 09/04/
Rs.5500- 2014,
9000 could
V Pay not
Commission process
due to
court for
ACP
* Centre already paid them Arrears and Retirement Benefits as per their Pay under MACP"
17. The chart reveals that all the petitioners were given the pay scale
of Rs.425-700 (not Rs.425-800) w.e.f January 1, 1986 in terms of
recommendations of Gupta Committee and thereafter got the benefit of
OTUM, in the scale of Rs.550-900/- on completion of 8 years of service.
Insofar as the petitioners in W.P (C) 5099/2012 are concerned (at Serial
No.1 & 2 above), they were given OTUM in the scale of Rs.425-700, as
that was the next higher scale to Rs.380-560. After, the
recommendations of Gupta Committee were acted upon, the scale of
Technical Assistants, having been revised to Rs.425-700, the scale on
OTUM, after 8 years also underwent a change to Rs.550-900. It was a
coincidence, that the petitioners in W.P(C) 5099/2012 had completed
eight years of service before January 1, 1986 and were granted OTUM in
the pay scale of Rs.550-900 w.e.f January 1, 1986.
18. I note, in its recommendations the Gupta Committee has justified
the scale of Rs.1400-2300 (pre revised Rs.425-700) on the basis of
comparable designations and qualifications held by Technical Assistants
in the University. The grant of a higher scale of Rs.425-700 (revised
scale Rs.1400-2300) cannot be construed as an upward movement on the
basis of eight years service. Even, if such is the position, more
particularly with regard to the two petitioners in WP(C) 5099/2012, the
scale on OTUM got revised after Gupta Committee recommendations to
Rs.550-900. The stand of the respondents, that the petitioners got
financial upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.425-700 on completion of
eight years of service is not substantiated as, the petitioners in the
W.P(C) 5096/2012, despite not completing eight years as on January 1,
1986, had got the benefit of pay scale of Rs.425-700. It must be
conclusively held that the grant of Rs. 425-700 was not a financial
upgradation but was as rationalization of pay scale in terms of the
recommendations of Gupta Committee. Hence, they would be entitled to
the benefit of 2nd ACP from the dates due in accordance with the
instructions issued by DoPT as has been adopted by the respondents
herein.
19. On implementation of this order, if further benefits under MACP,
needs to be granted in a given case, the same shall be effected by the
respondents under the MACP scheme. The benefits in terms of this order
shall be disbursed within a period of three months from today.
20. The writ petitions are disposed of with no orders as to costs.
(V.KAMESWAR RAO)
JUDGE
AUGUST 28, 2015
akb
