Ram Nath vs Secretary Ministry Of Defence & ...
2015 Latest Caselaw 2657 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 3155/2015
       RAM NATH                                          ..... Petitioner
                          Through     Mr. Vinod Zutshi, Advocate

                          versus

       SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE & ORS.... Respondents
                    Through  Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Standing
                             Counsel for the UOI

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
                    ORDER

       %            27.03.2015

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. (ORAL)

By this Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner questions the tenability of the

impugned order dated 05.12.2014 passed by the learned Central

Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter

referred to as the 'learned Tribunal') in Original Application (in short

'OA') No. 4173/2013.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner

was appointed as Halwai on 22.10.1983 in the Pay Scale of Rs. 200-3-

212-4-232-EB-4-240/- but has been denied the approved Pay Scale and

Grade as recommended by the 5th and 6th Central Pay Commission on the

post of Halwai which further includes the grant of special pay as per the

order of the Government of India and also the benefits under the ACP and

MACP schemes.

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The OA preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed by the

learned Tribunal on the ground of limitation and also on the merits of the

claim of the petitioner.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel who appears on

advance notice on behalf of the respondents has drawn attention of this

Court to the Office Memorandum No. 3/1/(IV)/97-Dir (C), dated

24.09.1998, read with addendum of even number, dated 21.10.1998

issued by the Dept. of Per. & Trg., Government of India in support of his

submission that the petitioner was appointed as a Cook and on the

recommendations of 5th Central Pay Commission, his Pay Scale was

revised to Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590/- but the petitioner has been

illegally claiming the Pay Scale of Halwai which was revised on the

recommendations of 5th Central Pay Commission to Rs. 3200-85-4900/-

and the petitioner wants to derive undue benefits of the expression

'Halwai' as is used in his pension papers and also in certain documents,

while the fact remains that the petitioner was appointed as a Cook and not

a Halwai. The learned counsel also invited the attention of this Court to

the extract of the relevant service record of the petitioner placed at 30 of

the present paper book wherein the Pay Scale of the petitioner referred

was that of a Cook, the same being at page No. 111 and in this sheet the

designation of the petitioner also has been referred to as a Halwai (Cook).

The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has already been

granted all the necessary revisions in his Pay Scale pursuant to the

recommendations of the 5th & 6th Central Pay Commission and other

financial upgradations which were admissible to him but the petitioner is

not entitled to Grade Pay which was admissible on the post of Halwai.

We find considerable merit in the contentions raised by the learned

Standing Counsel for the respondents and also the reasoning given by the

learned Tribunal in their order. We find no merit in the present petition

and the same is hereby dismissed.

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.

I.S.MEHTA, J.

MARCH 27, 2015 v