Gujarat High Court
Pradeep Kumar Pandey vs Union Of India on 15 June, 2021
Bench: A. P. Thaker
C/SCA/1892/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/06/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1892 of 2021
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
PRADEEP KUMAR PANDEY
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
================================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHRUT BHANDARI(11297) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
PRITHU PARIMAL(9025) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNT K RAVAL(5558) for the Respondents.
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
and
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 15/06/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI)
1. Rule. Mr.Nikunt Raval, learned advocate waives service of
notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.
C/SCA/1892/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/06/2021
Considering the aspects of the matter, this petition has
been taken up for final hearing today with the consent of the
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.
2. By way of present petition under Articles 14, 16 and 226
of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed as
under:-
"7. The Applicant most humbly prays that-
A. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to admit and allow
the present Petition;
B. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/
or any other appropriate writ/order/ direction, quashing
and setting aside order being F.NO.DGGI/SZU/G-
12020/02/2020-21, dated 05.08.2020, annexed to the
present Petition at Annexure-I, and further be pleased to
direct the Respondent Authorities to grant the Petitioner
grade pay of Rs.5400/-, w.e.f. 08.06.2010 in Pay Band-2,
along with all consequential benefits;
B1. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set
aside the Office Memorandum dated 27.03.2019, issued
by CBIC vide letter no.F.No.A-23011/01/2019-Ad.HA.
C. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass appropriate
orders imposing suitable costs on the present
Respondents for their arbitrary actions as well as for
needlessly causing a situation wherein the present
Petitioner was constrained to approach this Hon'ble
Court;
D. This Hon'ble court be pleased to pass any other
further and consequential order as may be required in
C/SCA/1892/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/06/2021
the interest of justice considering the facts and
circumstances of the present case."
3. In response to the notice issued by this Court,
respondents have appeared through learned advocate
Mr.Nikunt Raval and affidavit-in-reply dated 20.3.2021 has
been filed on behalf of respondent nos.4 and 5 opposing grant
of any relief.
4. At the outset, we would like to observe that a petition
which has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus without
approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal is being
entertained only on the ground that the case of another
employee, who was similarly situated and who had challenged
the decision of the Tribunal by filing writ petition being Special
Civil Application No.346 of 2018, was entertained by this Court.
We are of the opinion that when the issue is covered and
similar case is considered even by Honourable the Apex Court,
it would be futile to ask the petitioner to avail alternative
remedy since notice has been issued in this matter.
5. The short facts of the case are that the present petitioner
is presently serving on the Post of Superintendent of Central
Goods and Service Tax and Customs in Daman
Commissionerate. That on the ground of introduction of Central
Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2008, which came into force
from 29.8.2008, and as per said Rules and Section II of Part-C
of First Schedule, the petitioner would be entitled to Grade Pay
to the tune of Rs.5400/- instead of Rs.4800/- since he had
completed services of four years.
C/SCA/1892/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/06/2021
6. We have gone through the decision of High Court of
Judicature at Madras in the case of M.Subramaniam v. Union
of India and Others delivered on 6.9.2010 by Division Bench
of Madras High Court, which has been upheld by the
Honourable Apex court in Civil Appeal No.8883 of 2011 as well
as oral judgment of this Court dated 10.4.2018 passed in
Special Civil Application No.346 of 2018. Having gone through
the facts of said case and applicability of ratio laid down in
those cases, we are of the opinion that the petitioner would be
entitled for relief prayed for in paragraph 7-B.
7. Hence, this petition is allowed. The respondent
authorities are hereby directed to grant benefit of fixation of
Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- in Pay Band-2, considering
abovementioned decisions, with all consequential and ancillary
benefits, which may be available to the petitioner. The
respondents shall complete the aforesaid exercise within a
period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
Sd/-
(A.J.DESAI, J)
Sd/-
(DR. A. P. THAKER, J)
R.S. MALEK
