Union Of India & Ors. vs V. K. Soni & Ors.
2017 Latest Caselaw 5576 Del

$~

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      W.P.(C) 4931/2017 & C.M. Nos.21321-21322/2017

                                    Date of Decision: 10th October, 2017

       UNION OF INDIA & ORS                            ..... Petitioners
                     Through:             Mr.Jagjit Singh, Adv. with
                                          Ms.Rashmi Malhotra, Adv.,
                                          Mr.Himanshu Kaushik, Adv. &
                                          Mr.Preet Singh, Adv.
                           versus

       V.K. SONI & ORS                                ..... Respondents

                      Through:            Nemo.

       CORAM:
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
           HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
VIPIN SANGHI, J

1. In terms of the last order, the petitioners have filed an additional

affidavit. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

proceed to dispose of the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 2nd August, 2016

passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New

Delhi in O.A. No.3666/2012 & O.A. No.558/2013. The said Original

Applications had been preferred by the respondents who are diploma

holders and had been appointed as Sub Overseer Mistry (SOM) in the

petitioner-Northern Railway. They approached the Tribunal with the

claim that they should be granted the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 in

place of the pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 w.e.f. 1st April, 1986. They

premised their claim on the decision of the Tribunal in O.A.

No.1684/2000 Mam Chand & Ors. Vs. Union of India through the

General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House & Ors. wherein

the applicant in that case had been granted the pay scale of Rs.1400-

2300 notionally w.e.f. 1st April, 1986. The writ petition preferred by

the petitioner-Railways against the said decision in the case of Mam

Chand & Ors. (supra) vide WP (C) No.5882/2000, was dismissed by

this Court on 10th August, 2010 and the Special Leave Petition

preferred by the petitioners herein before the Supreme Court was also

dismissed on 29th August, 2011.

3. The relief granted to Mam Chand & Ors. (supra) was on the

premise that in accordance with the Indian Railway Establishment

Manual, they were, while serving in temporary status, entitled to the

same pay scale as was admissible to the regular employees holding the

same position.

4. Pertinently, Mam Chand and others did not hold diplomas yet

they were granted the same pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 since they were

discharging duties of SOMs. It was, accordingly, directed that their

pay be fixed in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 w.e.f. 1st January, 1986

when the Fourth Pay Commission Report was implemented.

5. Since the respondents preferred their Original Applications only

in 2012-2013 as aforesaid, the Tribunal by following the decision in

Mam Chand & Ors. (supra) allowed the said Original Application

while making it clear that they would be entitled to notional fixation of

their pay in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 w.e.f. 1st January, 1986 but

the arrears were granted only from the date of filing of the Original

Applications.

6. The submission of Mr.Singh, learned counsel for the Petitioner

is that similarly placed employees namely Sh.Satish Kumar Sharma,

Sh.Manohar Balani, Mr.Arun Kumar Gupta, Mr.Yogesh Kumar,

Mr.Raghunath Singh & Mr.Manjoor Ali, had approached the Jodhpur

Bench of the Tribunal by preferring OA No.359 of 1989 and in the

said Original Application, they had claimed the grade of Rs.1400-

2300 apart from seeking regularization on the basis that they were

qualified diploma holders serving as SOMs. The Tribunal had

disposed of the said Original Application with the direction to the

Railways to frame a scheme within six months for the purpose of

regularization. Consequently, the petitioner had issued the order dated

9th September, 1994 regularizing the services of 41 SOMs/Mistry

Works including the Respondent herein, and granting them the grade

of Rs.1400-2300 with effect from the said date. The submission of

Mr.Singh is that since the respondents have been granted the grade of

Rs.1400-2300 w.e.f. 9th September, 1994, they were not entitled to

now claim the said grade notionally w.e.f. 1st January, 1986.

7. We do not find any merit in the submission of Mr.Singh. This

is for the reason that the respondents were not parties in O.A.

No.359/1989 preferred before the Jodhpur Bench of the Tribunal.

Thus, even if it were to be assumed that, the Tribunal had declined for

the grant of grade of Rs.1400-2300 to the applicants before it w.e.f. 1st

January, 1986 and they were granted the grade only w.e.f. 9th

September, 1994, the said decision did not bind the respondents as

they were not parties in the said proceedings. In our view, the

respondents were entitled to be treated in the same manner as Mam

Chand and others. In fact, we notice that Mam Chand and others who

have been granted the scale of Rs.1400-2300 notionally w.e.f. 1st

January, 1986, were not even qualified Diploma holders like the

respondents. In these circumstances, the respondents were certainly

entitled to notional fixation of their pay in the scale of Rs.1400-2300

w.e.f. 1st January, 1986. The Tribunal has restricted the actual relief to

the respondents with effect from the date of filing of the Original

Application.

8. In these circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the

impugned order.

The writ petition is dismissed.

C.M. Nos.21321-21322/2017

9. In view of the writ petition having been dismissed, these

applications do not survive for adjudication and are dismissed.

(VIPIN SANGHI) JUDGE

(REKHA PALLI) JUDGE

OCTOBER 10, 2017/aa