Karnataka High Court
Shri A Muralidharan vs The Union Of India on 5 March, 2025
-1-
WP No.12873 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
WP No. 12873 of 2022 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN:
SHRI A MURALIDHARAN,
S/O LATE DR C ARJUNAN,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
OCC. RETD. SENIOR ARCHITECT,
CCW, AIR, RESIDING AT NO.26,
2ND MAIN, VASANTHNAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BHUSHAN G, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE UNION OF INDIA,
BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING,
SHASTRI BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. UNION OF INDIA,
BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL,
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSION,
DEPT. OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
3. UNION OF INDIA,
BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
-2-
WP No.12873 of 2022
4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL,
ALL INDIA RADIO,
PRASAR BHARATHI,
AKASHWANI BHAVAN,
PARLIAMENT STREET,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
5. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
PRASAR BHARATI, TOWER C,
MANDI HOSUE, COPERNICUS MARG,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
6. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
CCW, ALL INDIA RADIO/PRASAR BHARATI,
6TH FLOOR, SOOCHANA BHAVAN,
CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD,
NEW DELHI - 110 003.
7. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER (IRLA),
NEW DELHI INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING,
7TH FLOOR, SOOCHANA BHAVAN,
CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD,
NEW DELHI - 110 003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SAROJINI MUTHANNA, CGC)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE
AN ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT
QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER REJECTING REQUEST OF
THE PETITIONER TO GRANT PAY IN THE GRADE PAY OF 8700/-
DATED 30.12.2020 AT ANNEXURE-A17 ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT; (B) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO FIX PAY OF
THE PETITIONER IN GRADE PAY 8700/- FROM THE DATE OF
HIS PROMOTION AS SENIOR ARCHITECT I.E., 05.11.2007 AND
GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS; (C) ALLOW THE WP
AND QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN O.A NO-170/00177/2021
DATED 25.05.2002 PASSED BY THE CAT, BENGALURU BENCH
AT ANNEXURE-D, ETC.
THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR JUDGMENT ON 07.02.2025, COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER' THIS DAY, V KAMESWAR
RAO J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CAV ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO)
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the
Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench,
Bengaluru ('the Tribunal' for short) in Original Application
No.170/00177/2021, whereby the prayer of the petitioner
for grant of grade pay of Rs.8,700/- from the date of his
promotion as Senior Architect i.e., 05.11.2007, with all
consequential benefits was dismissed by the Tribunal, by
stating in paragraphs No.18 to 20 as under:
"18. The applicant was granted the pay
attached to his post on promotion in the year 2007.
He has also retired in the year 2017. He cannot,
therefore, at this stage, in the year 2021 lay a claim
to grant of higher pay scale and consequent higher
pension. His application, therefore, suffers from
delay and latches as well and is barred by limitation
and consequently deserves to be dismissed.
19. Keeping in view the above facts, the OA
being devoid of any merit whatsoever, besides being
barred by limitation, deserves to be dismissed.
According, the OA is dismissed.
20. However, there shall be no orders so as to
costs."
2. The facts to be noted are, the petitioner was
appointed as Deputy Architect through UPSC as a direct
recruit in Civil Construction Wing of All India Radio in the
pay scale of 2200-4000 vide order dated 14.03.1991. He
was promoted to the post of Architect in the pay scale of
3000-4500 with effect from 02.09.1997. He was further
promoted to the post of Senior Architect in All India Radio
in the pay scale of 12000-16500 vide order dated
05.11.2007. The petitioner's pay scale under 6th CPC was
PB-3 (15600-39100) with Grade Pay of Rs.7,600/-. He
assumed the charge of Senior Architect on 05.11.2007. It
is a conceded position that the petitioner retired on
attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2017.
3. The claim of the petitioner for grade pay of
Rs.8700/- was made vide many representations starting
from the year 2013. They were finally rejected in the year
2020.
4. The case of the respondent is primarily that, the
said grade pay of Rs.8700/- cannot be given to the
petitioner for the reason that, the said grade pay is
available only to those officers who are appointed in
organized Group-A service, whereas, the recruitment rules
governing the appointment/promotion in the Civil
Construction Wing of All India Radio is not an organized
Group-A service. Further, as per DOPT, OM dated
20.11.2009, whereby the list of organized Group-A
services has been issued does not include Architect cadre
of the Civil Construction Wing of the All India Radio. That
apart, the grant of upgraded scale/pay is exclusive for
organized Group-A and subject to fulfillment of certain
conditions like actual availability of vacancies in the grade
and not automatically. Further, it is subject to completing
13 years of service in Group-A.
5. The Tribunal has dismissed the OA by holding that,
the parity and equalization of pay in all public
appointments amongst various cadres and posts in the
Government, has to be examined by an expert body such
as the Pay Commission and as such, there is very limited
scope for the Courts to examine such aspect and grant the
benefits as being sought by the petitioner herein.
6. We find that, one of the plea of the petitioner
before the Tribunal was, by placing reliance on the
decision of the Principal Bench of the Tribunal in the case
of Rajiv Dixit -Vs.- Union of India [OA No.1977/2011
and connected matters, decided on 26.07.2016],
wherein Sri. Rajiv Dixit was also working as a Senior
Architect in the Civil Construction Wing of the All India
Radio and senior to the petitioner. He was granted the
benefit of grade pay of Rs.8,700/- by the Tribunal.
According to the petitioner, the benefit of grade pay of
Rs.8,700/- has been given to Sri. Rajiv Dixit though after
his death, but to his legal heirs. Similar is the case of
Sri. Anil Kishore, who was also granted the benefit
pursuant to the orders passed by the Tribunal, as upheld
by the Delhi High Court in the year 2008. Further,
reliance was also placed on the decision of the Calcutta
Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Noorul Hoda -Vs.-
Union of India and Others [OA No.1127/2012,
decided on 30.08.2013], who was given a similar benefit
by the Tribunal, which judgment has attained finality till
the Supreme Court.
7. We find that, this aspect has not been dealt with
by the Tribunal in the impugned order, though specific
averments in that regard have been made by the
petitioner in his OA. In fact, the Tribunal refers to the
stand of the petitioner in his rejoinder seeking similar
benefit as granted to the aforesaid Officers. In paragraph
No.4(b) of the impugned order, the Tribunal notes the
stand of the respondents that the judgments in the cases
of Rajiv Dixit (supra), Anil Kishore (supra) and Noorul
Hoda (supra) are in personam. We have been informed
that the judgments in the cases of Rajiv Dixit (supra)
and Noorul Hoda (supra) have been implemented vide
orders dated 01.02.2017/18.12.2017. If that be so, the
petitioner being also a Senior Architect like Sri. Rajiv Dixit
and Sri.Anil Kishore, is entitled to the benefit of grade pay
of Rs.8700/-. The stand of the respondent that the benefit
as granted to Sri. Dixit and Sri. Kishore is in personam,
cannot be accepted as the petitioner is similarly placed
and entitled to the same benefit as was granted to the
above Officers. The only distinguishing factor is that
Sri. Dixit and Sri. Kishore have been pursuing the litigation
since the year 2005/2011. Whereas, the petitioner herein
had made the first representation only on 23.01.2013 and
thereafter reminders were given on 30.05.2015,
03.07.2015, 24.08.2015, 24.08.2016, 18.02.2018,
08.03.2019, 06.06.2019, 09.11.2019, 20.03.2020,
24.06.2020 and 17.12.2020 before filing the OA in the
year 2021.
8. We are of the view that the impugned order of the
Tribunal is liable to be set aside. We order accordingly.
The petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of grade pay
of Rs.8,700/- from the date of his promotion as Senior
Architect i.e., 05.11.2007 notionally. The actual benefits
shall be paid from one year before the date of filing of the
OA being No.170/00177/2021. The pay shall be fixed on
notional basis with effect from 05.11.2007. The
petitioner's pension and other benefits thereof shall also
be re-fixed and he be given the arrears thereof within
eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
The petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(V KAMESWAR RAO)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
PA
