Respected Sureshji,
I have received below mentioned letter from our most respected member having valuable suggestions on GP issue. The letter is addressed to our GS with copy to our circle so I request you to kindly ask new GS to take immediate action as suggested by Sh. Permanand. I think that authorization letter should be taken from Sh. Permanand to defend this case at different forums by the Association (CHQ). It is the duty of the Association also. Kindly also confirm from GS whether resolution passed by the body in the conference has been submitted to the Directorate or not. If not immediate action need to be taken to do so.
Dear Ingle Sir,
First of all hearty congratulations for becoming General Secretary of the Association. From the resolution passed in the All India Conference at Bangalore (as mentioned in some of the blogs of Circle Associations), we are very much hopeful for getting Grade Pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector Posts w.e.f. 01.01.2006.
2. Our prayer as requested in the OA No. 381/2010 before Hon’ble CAT is reproduced below (as mentioned in para 11 of the CAT order):
i) To declare that the applicants are legally eligible and entitled to grant of the revised pay structure of Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- in the Pay Bank PB-2 which were granted by way of normal replacement pay structure of Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- in the Pay Band PB-2 in terms of Annexure A-9 Office Memorandum dated 13.11.2009 and denial of it to the applicants is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India.
ii) To issue appropriate direction or order directing the respondents to grant the applicants 1 and 2 the revised pay structure of Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- in the Pay Bank PB-2 as it has been granted to Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in Central Secretariat Service recruited through Combined Graduate Level Examination Scheme A by the Staff Selection Commission with effect from their date of entitlement with consequential benefits including arrears of pay nd allowances within a time frame that may be fixed by this Tribunal.
3. Hon’ble CAT has considered the factors like the source and mode of recruitment/appointment, qualifications, the nature of work, the value thereof, responsibilities, reliability, experience, confidentiality, functional need, etc. in accordance with the Apex Court Judgment in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai, (2009) 13 SCC 635 and justified the parity established by the Central Pay Commissions between Inspector Posts and Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC & Assistants in CSS.
4. The parity of Inspector Posts with their counter parts in CBDT / CBEC & Assistants in CSS established by the 5th & 6th Central Pay Commissions has been emphatically justified by the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench in its order dated 19th October’2011 in the OA No. 381/2010.
5. Hon’ble Tribunal views mentioned in the various paras reproduced below may kindly be seen:
Para 26: From the perusal of the Recommendations of the Pay Commissions it could be easily discerned that the Pay Commissions have suggested certain measures relating to introduction of element of direct recruitment which was conspicuously absent earlier and without which comparison with the Inspectors in other Departments/Ministries could not be made. Once direct recruitment has been introduced,it was to the full satisfaction of the Pay Commission, which had in fact commented, "The Commission is recommending the merger of pre-revised pay scales of Rs 5500 - 9000 and Rs 6500 - 10500 which will automatically bring Inspector (Posts) on par with Assistants in CSS/Inspectors and analogous Posts in CBDT and CBEC."
The import of this observation of the Pay Commission is that the Pay Commission was very much interested to ensure pay parity of Inspector (Post) with Assistants of CSS and Inspectors and analogous posts in CBDT and CBEC.
Para 30: This Tribunal need not have to labour more to arrive at the finding that the functional responsibilities of the Inspector (Posts) are certainly onerous and evidently, it is on the basis of adequate justification that the successive Pay Commissions have appreciated the need to revise the pay scale of Inspector (Posts).
Para 31: The decision of the Ministry of Finance does not appear to have taken into account the clear recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission nor for that matter the full justifications given by the Department of Posts.
6. Moreover, Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench has specifically stated in para 33 of its judgment dated 19th October’2011 that “
".....the case has been considered and the Tribunal is of the considered view that there is no justification in denying the Inspector (Posts) the higher Grade Pay of Rs 4600 when the same is admissible to Inspectors of other Departments with whom parity has been established by the very Sixth Pay Commission vide its report at para 7.6.14 extracted above........"
7. Hon’ble CAT has allowed the OA to the extent that keeping in tune with the observations of the Sixth Pay Commission, coupled with the strong recommendations of the Department of Post and also in the light of our discussion as above, first respondent, i.e. the Ministry of Finance shall have a re-look in the matter at the level of Secretary and consider the case of the Inspector (Posts) for upgradation of their grade pay at par with that of the Inspector of income tax, of CBDT and CBEC.
8. In view of above, Department may be asked to expedite the process for implementation of Hon’ble CAT judgment regarding grant of Grade pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts w.e.f 01.01.2006 as already given to Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC & Assistants in CSS.
9. As three months from the issue of Hon’ble CAT order is already over, a legal notice may be served to the Respondents, if required.
Regards,
Permanand
ASP, PMU Division,
Dak Bhawan, New Delhi
