Monday, September 2, 2013

Update on our case 289/13 posted on 4th September'2013 at CAT Ernakulam

Dear Friends,


As you may be aware that our case 289/13 is posted on 04.09.2013 for argument. A brief note has been drafted for argument purpose. Kindly suggest if any other points are to be added. The same will be communicated to our counsel. Point wise our response is as follows:

Points raised by the Respondents in the Reply Statement

1.         There is no specific recommendation in para 7.6.14 to the effect that Inspector Posts are granted Pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500.

Our Response :
6th CPC in its recommendation vide para 7.6.14 has mentioned that :

“…………………… With this upgradation, Inspector Posts shall come to lie in an identical pay scale as that of their promotional post of Assistant Superintendent (Posts) (ASPOs). ASPOs, shall accordingly, be placed in the next higher pay scale of Rs.7450-11500………………..”

            Moreover, the recommendation in para 7.6.14 was also clearly explained by the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench in its order dated 19th October’2011, allowing OA No.381/2010 vide para  26 & 32. Some of the extracts are reproduced below:

            “…………. The import of the observation of the Pay Commission is that the Pay Commission was very much interested to ensure pay parity of Inspector (Posts) with Assistants of CSS and Inspector and analogous posts in CBDT and CBEC………..”

            “………….Thus, when the Pay Commission opined that by virtue of merger of the Pay Scales of Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500, the same would “automatically bring Inspector (Posts) on par with Assistants in CSS/ Inspector and analogous posts in CBDT and CBEC, what it meant was that from hence, Inspector (Posts) would sail in the same boat as his counterparts in the Income Tax Department or Central Excise or Customs Department or for the matter the Assistants in the CSS.”

            “………….The difference in the Grade Pay is not one created by the Pay Commission but the same is due to the fact that as late as in 2009, it is the Government of India which had raised the Grade Pay of the Pay Scale Rs.6500 – 10500 that existed as on 01.01.2006 vide order dated 13.11.2009 ………………………”

            “………… In fact had the above enhancement in the Grade Pay been recommended by the Pay Commission, it would not have omitted to consider such an increase in the Grade Pay of Inspector (Posts) as well……………………………………”

            The Hon’ble Tribunal further held that there is no justification in denying the Inspector (Posts) the higher Grade Pay of Rs.4600, when the same is made admissible to Inspector of other Departments with whom parity has been established by the Sixth Pay Commission as per its report at para 7.6.14.


2.         There is a “Taditional Parity” & Wholesale Identity between Inspectors CBEC/CBDT and Assistant of CSS. There is no comparison between Assistant CSS & Inspector CBEC/CBDT and Inspector Posts, as they are performing different duties.

Our Response :

            ‘Wholesale Identity’ between two groups would involve matters relating to Nature of work, Educational Qualification, Mode of Appointment, Experience etc. It is a fact that there is no difference in educational qualification, mode of Appointment or experience between the Inspector of Posts under the Department of Posts and those Inspectors and analogous post in CBDT/CBEC  & Assistants in CSS.
            Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench in para 28,& 29 of its order dated 19th October’2011 elaborately explained the Roles & Responsibilities of Inspector (Posts) and admitted in para 30 of its order that:
            “ This Tribunal need not have to labour more to arrive at the findings that the functional responsibilities of Inspector (Posts) are certainly onerous and evidently, it is on the basis of adequate justification that successive Pay Commissions have appreciated the need to revise the Pay Scale of Inspector (Posts).

            Also, once the Pay Commission have identified the posts for a particular higher scale of Pay with reference to their duties and responsibilities, it is not permissible to differentiate those categories by the Respondents in the matter of granting the higher Grade.

            Moreover, when the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance was asked to provide the documents available for establishing the “Taditional Parity” / Wholesale Identity between Inspectors CBEC/CBDT and Assistants in CSS, under Right to Information, it was replied that the information sought is not available in material form and is clarificatory in nature, it doesn’t come under the ambit of RTI Act’2005. Copy of the same enclosed with the OA as Annexure-23.

            Further, it is also a fact that Pay Scale of Inspector CBDT/CBEC was increased from Rs.5500-9900 to Rs.6500-10500 in April’2004, whereas the same benefit was extended to Assistant in CSS only from 15th Sept’2006.
           
3.         There is hierarchical difference due to presence of post of Asst. Superintendent in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-, in the Department of Posts.

Our Response :

            It is a fact that there is a Post of ASPOs in Department of Posts. However, the parity made and recommended by the expert body namely, the Pay Commission and accepted by the Government cannot be denied under any pretext.

            Also, It is worthy to mention that 6th Central Pay Commission in Para 3.1.3 had recommended absolute parity in terms of hierarchical structure of office staff in field and Secretariat offices up to the level of Assistants and this recommendation was accepted by the Government. The above factual aspects were considered while issuing OM F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 16.11.2009 as indicated in paragraph 4 of Annexure A-10.

            Moreover, in Annexure A-20 recommendation, it has been clearly pointed out by the Department of Posts that the hierarchical difference i.e absence of intermediary cadre like ASPOs in CBDT/CBEC and CSS, can be resolved by allowing Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Inspector Posts and retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent of Posts also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- similar as in the Accounts Cadre of Department of Posts and in other Ministries / Departments. This may be accepted as workable solution. For the fixation of Pay on promotion from one post to another where the promotional post carries the same grade pay as that of feeder post, Ministry of Finance already issued an OM No. 10/02/2011-EIII/A dated 07.01.2013 (Annexure-A 24).

4.         In case the demand of Inspector posts for the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- is accepted, it will have cascading effect involving huge financial implications. Also, the demand for upgradation from similarly placed in Mail Motor Service etc will arise immediately.

Our Response :

            The apprehension of the Respondents regarding cascading effect is only hypothetical and not based on any facts.  The Asst. Manager and Manager, Mail Motor Service in Department of Posts are already in the Grade of Rs.4600/- & Rs.4800/- respectively, hence placing Inspector Posts in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- equal to their promotional post of Assistant Superintendent of Posts will not have any cascading effect either within the Department or outside the Department.



Further, the Financial implications were calculated as Rs.1.82 crores only by the Integrated Finance Wing of the Department of Posts and after approval of the Secretary (Posts), it was communicated to Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance along with its proposal (Annexure A-20) to allow Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Inspector Posts, retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent of Posts also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-. 

 Additional points, to be raised during argument may  be communicated to the email ID ipgp4600@gmail.com at the earliest.

Thanks,
Permanand.


Friday, April 5, 2013

Update of our CAT Case OA No.289/13

Dear Friends,

 Our case (OA No.289/13) has been admitted by the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench. Four weeks time has been given to the respondents for filing their reply and two weeks for our rejoinder, if any. The case stands posted for 10.06.2013.

Thanks.
Permanand.

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Case for Grade pay upgradation for Inspector Posts filed at CAT Ernakulam Bench


Dear Friends,

    Our case (OA No. 289/13) for Grade pay upgradation for Inspector Posts has been filed at CAT Ernakulam Bench. The case is listed for 05.04.2013 (tomorrow) at Sl. No.1. in the Division  Bench consisting of Hon'ble Dr. K.B.S Rajan (Judicial Member) and Hon'ble Ms. K.Noorjehan (administrative member). In our case, Sh. Vilas Ingale, GS AIAIP & ASP, Sh. Niranjan Kumar, ASP BD (Adhoc), RO Calicut and myself are the applicants.

     We should appreciate the efforts and cooperation by  Sh. Vilas Ingale, GS AIAIP & ASP, Sh. Ajit Kurian, Circle Secretary AIAIP & ASP Kerala Circle, Sh. P.Ajit , ASP, Postal Directorate, Sh. Anto Manalil, ASP CSD, Kerala Circle and all members who have supported the case.

   As discussed with the counsel, our case is expected to be  finalized by around three months period. Let us hope for the best.

Thanks.

Permanand.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Garde Pay of Inspector Posts - Further action for Justice


Dear friends,

             The official rejection letter of the proposal for upgradation of Grade  Pay is yet to be received from the Department. However, the case has been discussed with our counsel at Ernakulam. As suggested by him, we have to challenge the rejection of Grade Pay hike by MOF before the Hon’ble CAT. As informed by the counsel, since the judgment in the earlier OA 381/2010 had been delivered by the Ernakulam Bench itself and arguments in detail was also held last time,  we may expect the final order in our case within four months of filing the OA.

2.            We have received the information from DoP under RTI along with the copy of the note sheet. As per the information received, the issue regarding grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Inspector (Posts) was examined by DoP and forwarded to Ministry of Finanace and the claim was finally rejected under MOF, D/o Expenditure UO Note No. 6(7)/E.III(B)/2010 dated 24.08.2012. Hence, we will not wait for the official rejection letter.  However, some of the documents have been asked from MOF under RTI on the basis of remarks noted by  them on the  DoP file. So, we are planning to challenge the rejection of Grade Pay hike by MOF before the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench by the end of this month or maximum by first half of November’2012.

3.            We have shared the available documents with our counsel and discussed the case over phone. Further, Sh. Anto ASP, RO Ernakulam visited the counsel office at Ernakulam. Cooperation by Sh. Ajit Kurian, Circle Secretary, Kerala Circle and Sh. Anto is very much appreciated. As per the discussion held with the counsel, All India Association of Inspectors & ASPOs may become a party in this case, if they desire so.  The cost of this case is expected 1 - 1.2 lakhs.  If the Association wishes to finance for the case, they may do so. Otherwise, plan for collection of fund will be informed in the blog later on. Decision in this regard by the Association may be taken in the CWC meeting scheduled to be held on 12th & 13th October’2012. Our GS has already been requested through email as I am not in a position to attend the CWC meeting due to some unavoidable reason.

4.            RTI Information received from DoP has already been shared.  Following information have been asked last month  under RTI from Department of Extpenditure, MOF:
a)    What was the basis of evaluation by the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) for granting common pay scale/grade pay for the cadres in Grade pay of Rs.4200 & Rs.4600. The comparative Analysis report / Evaluation sheet of 6th CPC for all cadres in Grade pay Rs. 4200 & Rs.4600 may please be provided.

b)    The details of the basis for increase in pay scale of Inspectors CBEC/CBDT from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f  21.04.2004 along with the note sheet of the relevant file may please be provided.

c)   The details of the basis for increase in pay scale of Assistants in CSS from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f  15.09.2006 along with the note sheet of the relevant file may please be provided.

d)  Documents available for establishing the “Traditional Parity” / wholesale identity between Inspectors CBEC/CBDT and Assistants in CSS may please be supplied. 

e)     What was the basis of job evaluation carried out by the 5thCPC & 6thCPC for Inspector (Posts) and granting equal pay scale/Grade pay to Inspector (Posts) and Inspectors CBDT/CBEC & Assistants in CSS ? The copy of the related documents may please be supplied.
 
f)       The details regarding comparison of “Duties & Responsibilities” of Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts) may please be provided. Whether, on the basis of that comparison, the Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts) may be placed in the same pay scale/grade pay? If not, the details of the reasons may also be furnished.

g)      The details of the feeder cadres and their promotional cadres carrying the same grade Pay, under all Ministries /Department of the central Government, may please be provided. The policy adopted at the time of promotion to a post carrying the same Grade Pay may also be intimated. 

h)      The details of the action taken till date on the order of the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench dated 19.10.2011 in OA No.381/2010 (wherein Secretary, Ministry of Finance was the first respondent)  regarding upgradation of grade pay of Inspector Posts from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 may please be provided. Copy of the note sheets of the relevant file of the Department of Expenditure may also be provided.”

5.            Your valuable comments are invited. Further, more & more information, useful for our case may be asked from Department Of Expenditure under RTI and shared.

Thanks.
Permanand.   

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Sad News…. Demand for Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) rejected by MOF………Ready for further legal battle


Dear Friends,
  It is really sad to intimate that Department of Expenditure, MOF has rejected the demand for grade pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector (Posts) even after the full justification given by Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench in its order dated 18.10.2011 in OA No. 381/2010 and the good viable proposal submitted by DoP. The official rejection letter is yet to be received. However, as per information received  from DoP under RTI, the issue regarding grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Inspector (Posts) was examined and forwarded to Ministry of Finanace and the claim was finally rejected under MOF, D/o Expenditure UO Note No. 6(7)/E.III(B)/2010 dated 24.08.2012.The note sheet of the relevant file has also been received under RTI from DoP.

2.  As available in the note sheets (17/N), the DoP had sent the following proposal with concurrence of IFW and approval of Secretary (Posts) to Department of Expenditure, MOF:

“The hierarchical difference i.e non-availability of intermediary cadre like Assistant Superintendent Posts in CBDT/CBEC and CSS can be resolved by allowing Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in Department of Posts (a GCS Group B Non-Gazetted Post) and retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent Posts (a GCS Group B Gazetted Post) also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600. In the Accounts cadre, the cadre of Accounts Officer is in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2. Its promotional post of Senior Accounts Officer is in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3 & its further promotional post of ACAO also in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3. This would not thereby involve upgradation in Grade Pays of Assistant Superintendent Posts and PS Group B.”

3.   MOF has rejected the demand for Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) without examining the above proposal, and stated the following (written in red colour):

(I)    There was no specific recommendation in para 7.6.14 to the effect that Inspector Post are granted Pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500.

(It seems that MOF has not gone through the para 26 of Hon’ble CAT order dated 19.10.2011 in OA No. 381/2010, wherein the import of the observation of the Pay Commission has been clearly mentioned. Moreover, as mentioned in para 7.6.14 of 6th CPC report   “…………With this upgradation, Inspector (Posts) shall come to lie in an identical pay as that of their promotional post of Assistant Superintendent (Posts) [ASPOs]. ASPOs shall, accordingly, be placed in the next higher pay scale of Rs.7450-11500………….”)

(II)   Inspectors in CBEC/CBDT were placed in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f 21.04.2004 i.e prior to 6th CPC by an executive order of the Govt. keeping in view of their parity with Inspectors of CBI/IB and court directions of CAT Jabalpur Bench. Further, Asstts. Of CSS have also been granted the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f 15.09.2006 on the basis of their traditional parity with Inspectors CBEC/CBDT. Further, it was the conscious decision of the Govt. to keep Asstts. In CSS/Inspector and analogous post in CBEC/CBDT in the higher pre-revised scale i.e Rs.7450-11500/- considering their pre-revising relativities, hierarchical structure, mode of recruitment etc.  The mode of recruitment was not the only criteria as contended by the applicants in the OA. In various cases, Apex Court also opined that wholesale identity between two groups would involve matters relating to nature of work, educational qualification, mode of recruitment, experience etc.

      (The details of the basis for increase from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-  10500 for Inspectors CBEC/CBDT w.e.f  21.04.2004 and for Assistants in       CSS w.e.f 15.09.2006 along with the note sheet of the relevant file have been asked from MOF under RTI.  Also, Documents available for establishing the “Traditional Parity” / wholesale identity between Inspectors CBEC/CBDT and Assistants in CSS have been asked. MOF Response is awaited.  Further, wholesale identity should be decided by the Expert body i.e Pay Commission. 5th & 6th CPC had rightly did so for Inspector (Posts) and granted equal pay scale/ grade pay to that of Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS. Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association, (2010) 5 SCC 225 wherein it has been stated as under:-

  "23. It is now well settled that parity cannot be claimed merely on the basis that earlier the subject post and the reference category posts were carrying the same scale of pay. In fact, one of the functions of the Pay Commission is to identify the posts which deserve a higher scale of pay than what was earlier being enjoyed with reference to their duties and responsibilities, and extend such higher scale to those categories of posts.")

(III)  It is pertinent to mention here that the OM dated 13.11.2009 and 16.11.2009 came into existence as a result of demand from various quarters of Govt. seeking upgradation for pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500 due to functional requirement. However, hierarchical structure of Inspector Posts does not demand such functional requirement, as post of ASP in the scale of Pay of Rs.9300-34800 GP of Rs.4600/- PB-2 corresponding to the pre-revised scale of Rs.7450-11500 still exists, even after implementation of 6th CPC.

(Regarding the hierarchical differences, a viable proposal was submitted by DoP wherein it was clearly mentioned that the hierarchical difference i.e. non-availability of intermediary cadre like Assistant Superintendent Posts in CBDT/CBEC and CSS can be resolved by allowing Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in Department of Posts (a GCS Group B Non-Gazetted Post) and retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent Posts (a GCS Group B Gazetted Post) also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600. The example of AO, Sr. AO & ACAO was also given in the proposal. But, MOF overlooked the same.)

(IV)   Since Inspector Post have come in the Pay Scale of Rs.9300-3400 GP of Rs.4200/- PB-2 corresponding to pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500, the hierarchical posts in their cadre i.e ASP and SP had to be placed in the GP OF Rs.4600/- and Rs.4800/- respectively to maintain the relativity in the cadre. Moreover, the scale of other similarly placed posts i.e Asstt. Manager and Manager in mail Motor Service were also placed in the GP of Rs.4600/- and Rs.4800/- respectively. In case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, it will have cascading effect involving huge financial implications. Also, the demand for upgradation from similarly placed posts in Mail Motor Service etc. will arise immediately.

(In the proposal, it was clearly mentioned that this would not involve upgradation in Grade Pays of Assistant Superintendent Posts and PS Group B. Asst. Manager & Manager, Mail Motor Service are placed in the Grade pay of Rs.4600 & Rs.4800 respectively. Hence the imagination of MOF that In case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, the demand for upgradation from similarly placed posts in Mail Motor Service etc. will arise immediately, is hypothetical. Further, while submitting the proposal, DoP had given the figures for financial implications and for Inspector (posts), it is Rs. 1.01 crores only. Hence the ground that in case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, it will have cascading effect involving huge financial implications, does not hold any ground.)

(V)  The duties and responsibilities assigned to Assistant of CSS and Inspector, CBDT/CBEC are quite different from Inspector (Posts). There is no comparison between Assistants CSS & Inspector CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts). They are performing different duties in their respective cadres.

(As a matter of fact, the duties and responsibilities assigned to different cadres in different Department / Ministries will be different and after comparison only, specific pay scale/grade pay is given to particular cadres by the expert bodies i.e Pay Commission. The details regarding comparison of “Duties & Responsibilities” of Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts) have been asked from MOF under RTI.
Further,  Para 30 of CAT Ernakulam Bench Order dated 19.10.2011 in OA No. 381/10 reproduced below:
“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).”

 4.    It is very much clear from the grounds given by MOF that they were pre-determined not to allow Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in any case and they simply overlooked the full justification given by the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench and also the good viable proposal given by DoP. It can also be seen that the matter was disposed first time at the level of Jt. Secretary even after the clear instruction from Hon’ble CAT to re-look in the matter at the level of Secretary.  It is also evident form the notings of the DoP at 28/N, which is reproduced below:
                “Views taken by Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure contains neither any details of examination of the proposal made by this Department on 17/N nor reasoning based on which the proposal was admitted/rejected.”

5.     Accordingly the file was re-referred to the Department of Expenditure, MOF. However, Department of Expenditure, MOF returned the file stating that: 

   “The matter has been examined in this Deptt. and AM is advised to issue a    reasoned speaking order rejecting the claim of the applicants on the grounds indicated in U.O note dated 28.05.2012.
      This issues with the approval of Finance (Secretary).”  

6.            Our case for upgradation of Grade pay of Inspector (Posts) to Rs.4600 under OA No. 381/2010, had already been considered by Hon’ble  CAT Ernakulam Bench within the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court in respect of the powers of the Tribunal in dealing with the fixation of Pay scale and  had viewd that :

(a)   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.

(b)    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. The Ministry of Finance has to have a re-look in the matter dispassionately at the level of Secretary keeping in view the aforesaid discussion.

7.    From the documents received under RTI, the rejection of our demand of Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) has been disclosed. However, we may wait for the official rejection letter.   Further, we wish to move to High Court at the earliest, to get Justice.

                Views and comments are requested, so that we may move further.

Thanks.
Permanand

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Judgement in our Grade Pay case OA No.381/2010

Dear Friends, 
 The judgment in our Grade Pay case OA No.381/2010 has been published and is available on the CAT website with the following link    
  
  In the judgement, the Hon'ble CAT has categorically stated in the second last  para  No.33 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........"

Extract of some paras of the judgement are reproduced below:


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. This recommendation of the Pay Commission is in tune with the observations of the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association, (2010) 5 SCC 225 wherein it has been stated as under:-
"23. It is now well settled that parity cannot be claimed merely on the basis that earlier the subject post and the reference category posts were carrying the same scale of pay. In fact, one of the functions of the Pay Commission is to identify the posts which deserve a higher scale of pay than what was earlier being enjoyed with reference to their duties and responsibilities, and extend such higher scale to those categories of posts."

Para 27.    When the question of pay scale parity is examined, as stated by the Apex court, the Court has to make analysis in respect of factors like the source and mode of recruitment/appointment, qualifications, the nature of work, the value thereof, responsibilities, reliability, experience, confidentiality, functional need, etc.    Viewed from this point, first as to the mode of recruitment. As stated earlier, it was at the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission, element of Direct Recruitment had been introduced and in fact there has been common examination in respect of inspectors in various departments, including Inspector (Posts). In fact, the statistics furnished by the applicants vide Annexure A-14 which has been rightly highlighted by the Senior Counsel at the time of hearing, would reflect that the cut off marks in respect of Inspector (Posts) is more than the cut of marks of Inspector (Central Excise). Thus, this requirement is fully met with.

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.

Para 32.    Thus, when the Pay Commission opined that by virtue of merger of the pays scales of Rs 5500 - 9000 and Rs 6500 - 10500, the same would "automatically bring  Inspector  (Posts)    on  par  with   Assistants  in CSS/Inspectors and analogous posts in CBDT and CBEC, what it meant was that from hence, Inspector (Posts) would sail in the same boat as his counterparts in the Income Tax Department or Central Excise or Customs Department or for that matter the Assistants in the CSS. "The difference in the grade pay is not one created by the Pay Commission but the same is due to the fact that as late as in 2009, it is the Government of India which had raised the grade pay of the pay scale 6500 - 10500 that existed as on 01-01-2006 vide order dated 13-11-2009,       whereby posts which were in the pre-revised scale of Rs 6,500 - 10,500 as on 01-01-2006 and which were granted the normal replacement pay structure of grade pay of Rs 4,200/- in the pay band PB 2 will be granted grade pay of Rs 4600 in the pay band PB 2 corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale of Rs 7450-11500 w/e/f/ 01-01-2006. And, if a post already existed in the pre-revised scale of Rs 7450-11500, the posts being upgraded from the scale of Rs 6500 - 10500 should be merged with the post in the scale of Rs 7450 - 11500/-. In fact had the above enhancement in the grade pay been recommended by the Pay Commission, it would not have omitted to consider such an increase in the grade pay of Inspector (Posts) as well.


Para 33:   Thus, within the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court in respect of the powers of the Tribunal in dealing with the fixation of Pay scale 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. The Department of Post also equally recommends the same and as such, at appropriate level, the Ministry of Finance has to have a re-look in the matter dispassionately and keeping in view the aforesaid discussion. The ASPOs, as a result can be granted a grade pay of Rs.4800/- and the Superintendents grade pay of Rs.5400, as in the case of Superintendents of Central Excise & Customs.


Para 34.     In view of the above, the OA is allowed 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. This will make the grade pay of Inspector (Posts) at par with that of the promotional post of Assistant Superintendents of Post Offices, it is expedient to consider and upward revision of the grade pay of ASPs as well. All the necessary details and statistics as required by the Ministry of Finance shall be made available by the second Respondent i.e. the Director General of Posts. It is expected that within a reasonable time, the respondents shall arrive at a judicious decision and implement the same.  

            Further course of cation may be decided collectively so that the desired goal of getting grade pay of Rs.4600 from 01.01.2006 for Inspector Posts can be achieved soon. 

Thanks again.
Permanand

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

OA No. 381/2010 regarding grade pay of Inspector Posts has been allowed by the Tribunal

Dear friends,
         Our case regarding  Grade Pay of Inspector Posts, ( OA  No. 381/10) is allowed by the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench today with a direction to the Secretary (Ministry of Finance) (1st respondent) to take necessary action to upgrade the grade pay of Inspector Posts to Rs 4600 at par with Inspector of Income Tax / CBDT/CBEC, as per the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. The Hon'ble Tribunal also observed that this would make the GP of IPs at par with the present GP of ASPs and hence it would be desirable to upgrade the GP of ASPs as well accordingly. 

           Copy of the judgement will be received shortly. Further course of action may be decided after getting the order copy. Thanks for all your support and cooperation. 

Note: Copy of the judgement, after receipt from court will be supplied by email, if desired.
Thanks.
Permanand

Pronouncement of Orders in our CAT case 381/2010

Dear friends,
                    As per the cause list of Ernakulam CAT (Court II), our case No.381/2010 has been listed (at Sl. No.1) for 19.10.2011  for pronouncement of orders. We may hope for the best.
Thanks.
Permanand.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Development in CAT Case 381/2010 filed at CAT Ernakulam

Dear Friends,
     As ascertained from the counsel, our case has been heard today by the Tribunal and the decision is kept  reserved. We may expect the judgement by approx. 15-20 days.


Thanks.
Permanand

Friday, March 25, 2011

CAT Case Update

Dear Friends,
                    It is unfortunate to state that our case has not been heard on 25.03.2011 also. The counsel of the respondent was not present in the court and has submitted medical certificate for illness. If Required, Miscellaneous Application(MA) will be filed before Honb'l tribunal for early hearing of the case. Hope you all will understand the situation and cooperate with us. Further course of action may perhaps be suggested, if any. 
Thanks.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

CAT CASE UPDATE

Dear Friends,
Our case was posted today for hearing. Our friend Sri Chandrakantha Pladhi was present in the Tribunal. Counsel of the Respondent again requested today for three weeks time. Hon'ble Tribunal has granted one week time and the case is posted on 09.03.2011.

Thanks.
Permanand.

Friday, February 18, 2011

Update of our CAT case

Dear Friends,
       Our case came up for hearing today. Counsel of the Respondents requested two weeks time stating that he is not prepared for the argument. Hon'ble Tribunal has granted ten days time as last chance and the case is posted to 03.03.2011.
Thanks.
Permanand.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Update regarding CAT Case

Dear Friends
                 Our case has been posted for tomorrow i.e. 18.02.2011. Discussion with advocate regarding argument has been completed.  Sri. Chandrakanta Paladhi and some of our friends will attend the hearing in the tribunal. Further updates will be given by tomorrow evening.
HOPE FOR THE BEST!!!
Thanks 
Permanand

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Updates regarding CAT Case

Dear Friends,
   Our case could not be heard today and is posted after two weeks. The next date of posting will be known by Monday.  If the case is not heard on next sitting, early hearing request will be filed in CAT.
Thanks.
Permanand.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

News regarding CAT Case OA No.381/2010

Dear friends,
     Our case is posted on 27.01.2011 for FINAL hearing. All the points for argumrnt have already been discussed with the Advocate. We may hope for the best. 
Thanks.
Permanand. 
 

Thursday, January 13, 2011

update regarding CAT case

Dear friends,
 Today we have discussed the case with the Advocate for the argument purpose. However, as informed by the counsel, our case will not be heard tomorrow due to unavoidable reasons. The case is likely to be posted after 18.01.2011 for final hearing. Any further updates will be given in due course. 
Thanks.
Permanand

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Grounds for argument in CAT case No.381/2010

Dear friends,
On the basis of reply given by the respondents, some grounds have been prepared for argument on 14.01.2010, which is furnished below :

Ground 1:      
It is a fact and has been admitted by the respondents in para 5 of the 2nd  additional reply statement dated 24.12.10 that “The 6th CPC in para No. 7.6.14 recommended for upgradation of the Pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 with a view to bring the Inspector Posts on par with Assistants in CSS and Inspectors and analogous post in CBDT/CBEC.” The same was accepted by the Government. Hence, Inspector Posts are entitled for the grade Pay of Rs.4600 to maintain the parity established by the Central Pay commission with Assistants in CSS and Inspectors and analogous post in CBDT/CBEC.

Ground 2:
            Grade Pay of Assistants in CSS, which were in the Pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 as on 01.01.2006, was enhanced from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 vide MOF OM dated 16.11.09 (A-11). 6th CPC in para 3.1.3 (A-20) recommended to maintain parity with the similarly placed personnel employed in field offices and the secretariat. In the recommendation, it was made clear that this parity would need to be absolute up to the grade of Assistants. Hence the parity between Assistants and Inspector Posts must be maintained. The argument that only group B posts in CSS (i.e Section Officer) are comparable with the Group B post in Department of Posts (i.e Superintendent of Post offices), denying the parity between Assistants in CSS and Inspector Posts, is against the recommendation of the 6th CPC.

Ground 3:
            MOF vide OM dated 13.11.2009(A-9) enhanced the grade Pay of Posts which were in the Pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 as on 01.01.2006 to Rs.4600, which was reproduced in the MOF OM dated 16.11.09 (A-11) and on the basis of that grade Pay of Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC enhanced from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600. It is a fact and has been admitted by the respondents that the Pay scale of Inspector Posts was upgraded to Rs.6500-10500 by the 6th CPC as on 01.01.2006. Thus the Pay scale of Inspector Posts as on 01.01.2006 was Rs.6500-10500 and hence the benefit of OM dated 13.11.2009 must be given to Inspector Posts also, as already given to Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC.

Ground 4:
            As clarified by MOF vide Annexure A-13, that in case of upgradation of Posts as a result of recommendation of 6th CPC, the grade Pay corresponding to the upgraded Post should be given. It is a fact and has been admitted by the respondents that the Pay scale of Inspector Posts was upgraded to Rs.6500-10500. Also, the corresponding grade Pay w.r.t Pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 is Rs.4600 w.e.f 01.01.2006 as evident from MOF OM dated 13.11.2009 (A-9) and dated 16.11.2009 (A-11). Hence Inspector Posts are entitled for grade Pay of Rs.4600 w.e.f 01.01.2006.

Ground 5:
            The contention of the respondents that the merger of Inspector Posts and ASPOs is not practically feasible as the Association is requesting for retaining gazetted status for the existing ASPOs, is not having any ground as in the Department of Post itself, the Post of Junior Accounts Officer (JAO), which was having non-gazetted status is merged with Assistant Accounts Officer (AAO) with gazetted status. Moreover, ASP and IPs have similar nature duties. Till today no higher responsibility or duties have been bestowed to ASPOs and no separate duty has been defined for them. Even after conferring Gazetted status no higher responsibility has been given to ASPs.

Ground 6:
            Inspector Posts should not be downgraded in comparison with their counter parts in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS only due to existence of an intermediary post in Department of Posts. Parity was given by the 5th and 6th CPC even after observing the intermediary posts and the parity should be maintained. Hence, existence of ASP cadre is not a valid reason to deny the due Grade Pay to Inspector Posts. If the Dept. feels it to be a hindrance for granting the eligible GP to Inspector Posts, then it is for the Dept. to resolve the issue. But it cannot deny the due benefits, which similarly placed Inspectors are enjoying. Department may find out the ways to settle the issue, if they feel it exists, after giving grade Pay of rs.4600 to Inspector Posts. Internal constraints, even if exists as per the view of the Department, cannot be a reason for not implementing a general order.

    You are requested to share your views at the earliest as our case is posted on 14.01.2011. Email may also be sent at Id ipgp4600@gmail.com . 
Thanks.
Permanand. 

Thursday, January 6, 2011

News regarding CAT Case OA No.381/2010


Dear friends,
 You may be aware that our CAT case regarding Grade Pay is posted on 14.01.2010. Respondents has given their reply to the Additional Rejoinder and copy of the same is uploaded for perusal.In the reply, Respondents have admitted that Pay scale of Inspector post was upgraded from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 from 01.01.2006. Now the respondents are defending by falsification of Documents as stated in Para 7 and many more places in the reply. It is stated that " .....due to issue of orders by Nodal Ministry on 13.11.2009, extending the benefit of grade Pay of Rs.4600 to such posts, which were in the Pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 prior to 1-1-2006,  the Inspector in CBDT/CBEC could derive the benefit, and as the upgradation is only from 1-1-2006, the Inspector Posts could not be extended the same. ......"  
   The extract of the OM dated 13.11.2009 issued by the MOF is reproduced below
 ".....Consequent upon the Notification of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, Department of Expenditure has received a large number of references from administrative ministries / departments proposing upgradations of the posts which were in the pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500 as on 1.1.2006 by been granting them grade pay of Rs.4600 in the pay band PB-2. The matter has been considered and it has now been decided that the posts which were granted the normal replacement pay structure of grade pay of Rs.4200 in the pay band PB-2, will be granted pay of Rs.4600 in the pay band PB-2 ...."
                  Hence it is clear that Department is trying to defend without having any justification for the same. We have already    submitted all the annexures including OM dated 13.11.2009 of MOF. As the case is posted on 14.01.2011, your comments on the reply by the Dept., is requested.  Hoping all your cooperation.
With regards,
Permanand

Update on CAT Case

Dear Friends,
 Our case has been posted on 14.01.2011(Friday) for hearing. Respondents have also given their reply today, which will be received by tomorrow. Copy of the reply will be uploaded on the blog, once it is received.
Thanks.
Permanand.
07.01.2011:- Copy of the reply by the respondents to the Addl. Rejoinder has been received. To down load the copy, please click here http://www.sendspace.com/file/wyxzxw . In case of any difficuly, please send your email ID and the copy will be mailed.
Thanks.
Permanand

Monday, November 22, 2010

OA No. 381/2010 - Present status

Our case OA No.381/10, which was posted today could not be heard as only one bench functioned today. The next date of posting will be known within a day or two. Moreover, the Respondents have not filed the reply to the Additional Rejoinder till today. Perhaps Respondent may request one or two week time before the Tribunal to reply the same. Further progress will be intimated shortly.
05.12.2010 : Our case has not been listed so far in the absence of Division Bench at CAT Ernakulam. We are in constant touch with our counsel. Any development in this regard will be intimated soon.
Thanks.
Permanand.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

News regarding CAT case 381/2010

Dear friends,
      As suggested by the Advocate, the additional Rejoinder is being filed in this case. One week time has been given by the Hon'ble CAT to file the Additional Rejoinder and two weeks to the Respondents for reply, if any. Hence, the argument could not happen yesterday. The case is next posted on 22.11.2010. In connection with the CAT case, I was at Ernakulam with Chandrakantha Pladhi for the last two days and the Additional Rejoinder has almost been finalised and will be filed at the earliest. The copy of the Additional Rejoinder will be published in the blog shortly. Hope you all will understand and cooperate.
28.10.10- To view the Copy of the Additional Rejoinder filed in the case, click the link below
http://www.sendspace.com/file/71rs1e

or

http://www.sendspace.com/file/1bg28s 

If at all any problem in downloading, pls. send your email ID, it will be mailed to you.

Thanks.
Permanand.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Reply by the Dept. on the Rejoinder in OA 381/2010

Dear Friends,
  The reply given by the Dept. on the Rejoinder has been received. The Dept. has again defended that Inspector Posts are not comparable with  Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistsnts in CSS. The reply is being studied as the case is posted on 21.10.10 for arguments. Your valuable suggestions are requested. To view the reply of the Dept., CLICK HERE.   
Thanks.
Permanand
Mob:09349049801

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Progress of CAT Case 381/2010 Filed for Grade pay hike

Dear friends,
    Our CAT case was posted today. No reply has been filed by the respondents on the rejoinder so far. The Tribunal has given two more weeks to the respondents to file the reply to the rejoinder, if any. The case is next posted to 21.10.2010  for final hearing/arguments. As explained by the counsel, the Tribunal takes some time before the final hearing/arguments to study the documents submitted by the applicants as well as  by the respondents. I along with my friends will attend the hearing on 21.10.10. Any further progress in the case will be intimated in due course.
Thanks.
Permanand. 
   

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Rejoinder in the OA No. 381/10 has been filed

Dear friends,
      The case heard on 03.09.10 and two weeks time has been granted to the respondents for the reply to the rejoinder. The case is posted to 21.09.10. Further information will be given in due course. (Edited on 05.09.10)

       Rejoinder in the OA 381/10 has been filed. All the issues raised by the Respondents in the reply statement have been suitably defended in the Rejoinder. Extract of Some main issues are given below:

Issue No.1 The Inspector Posts were not in the Pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500, hence they are not entitled for the benefit under OM dated 13.11.2009 issued by MOF.

      It is clear from Paragraph 7.6.14 of 6th Central Pay Commission Report that Inspector Posts was upgraded in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 on par with Inspectors and analogous posts in CBDT/CBEC as well as Assistants of Central Secretariat Service (CSS) with effect from 01-01-2006. Due to this upgradation only the pay scale of ASPOs was upgraded to the next higher pay scale of Rs.7450-11500. The contention of the respondents that Inspector Posts was upgraded in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 only notionally with effect from 01-01-2006 and therefore, they cannot be treated alike with the comparable posts in CBDT/CBEC is untenable. It is pertinent to point out that the 6th Central Pay Commission found parity among Inspector Posts, Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS and to effectuate this parity, the pay scale of Inspector Posts was upgraded with effect from 01-01-2006. Hence, any upgradation of pay scale or Grade Pay granted to Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS is equally applicable to the Inspector Posts and the incumbents in the post of Inspector Posts alone cannot be discriminated in the matter of revision of Grade Pay. The averments to the contrary are emphatically denied.

Issue No.2 Inspector Posts are not comparable to the Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS AND only Group B Post in Dept. of posts are comparable to the Group B posts in CSS/CBDT/CBEC. There is hierarchical problem due to intermediatory post of ASPOs in Dept. of Posts, unlike in CSS/CBDT/CBEC and if the Inspector Posts are given Grade Pay of Rs.4600, it will disturb the entire hierarchical structure of Inspector Posts and its promotional cadre both within the Departmental hierarchy and horizontal relativity outside the Department

         The pay scales recommended by the 5th Central Pay Commission and 6th Central Pay Commission and accepted by the Government for the following categories are given below :

                                                       Pay scale recommended by the 5th CPC  
                                                                   and accepted by the Govt.                                               
                                                                                                        Pay scale recommended by the 6th CPC                                                                                                                  and accepted by the Govt.
1 Assistants in CSS and Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC Rs.5500-9000                  9300-34800with GP Rs.4200
2 Inspector Posts                                                     Rs.5500-9000                  9300-34800with GP Rs.4200
3 CentralExcise/Customs Superintendent,
Income Tax Officer                                                 Rs.6500-10500                 9300-34800with GP Rs.4800
4 Section Officer in CSS                                         Rs.6500-10500                9300-34800with GP Rs.4800
5 Assistant Supdt. Of Posts                                     Rs.6500-10500                9300-34800with GP Rs.4600
6 Supdt. of Post Offices                                           Rs.7500-12000                9300-34800with GP Rs.4800

      It is evident from the above table that same pay scale/ Grade pay was granted by both 5th Central Pay Commission and 6th Central Pay Commission for Inspector Posts in comparison with Assistants in CSS and Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC. The Inspector (Posts) and other analogous posts in CBDT/CBEC and Assistsnts in CSS were enjoying the same scale of pay of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade of Rs. 4200/- with effect from 01-01-2006 and were continued to draw the same scale of pay and grade pay as on the date of issuance of Annexure A-9 O.M. Dated 13-11-2009 and Annexure A-11 O.M dated 16-11-2009 granting the upgraded Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- to the Inspectors of CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in the Central Secretariat respectively. Therefore, the persons like the applicants are subjected to hostile dicrimination in denying the grade pay of Rs. 4600/-
          Department of Post made a proposal to the Ministry of Finance recommending to extend the benefit of Annexure A-9 O.M dated 13-11-2009 and A-11 O.M. Dated 16-11-2009 and to grant the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- to the Inspector (Posts) to maintain parity between similar cadres. In the above proposal the Department had categorically stated that the pay of Inspector (Post) was upgraded to Rs. 6500-10500 with effect from 01-01-2006 and the parity agreed to in the pay scales of Inspector (Post) with Assistants (CSS) and Inspectors CBDT/CBEC has not been recognised and given effect to while issuing Annexure A-9 and A-11. Therefore, it is evident that there is discrimination in the matter of grating Grade Pay to the Inspector (Post). However, the Ministry of Finance did not approve the proposal and returned the same. The reason for non-granting of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- to the Inspector (Post) alone by the Ministry of Finance is on three grounds. Firstly, prior to 01-01-2006 the Inspector (Post) was in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 and secondly, the hierarchical structure in respect of Inspector (Post) is not comparable with the analogous posts in CBDT/CBEC. Thirdly, the 6th CPC specifically recommended the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- to the Inspector Posts. All the three reasons shown are entirely untenable. It is submitted that the pay scales of Inspector in CBDT/CBEC was upgraded from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500-10500 as per Annexure A-5 dated 21-04-2004 and on the basis of Annexure A-5, the pay scale of Assistants in CSS was upgraded in September, 2006 as per Annexure A-6. As earlier stated the scale of pay of Inspector (Post) and other analogous posts were same i.e. Rs. 6500-10500 as on 01-01-2006 and the revised pay scales also were granted to them with effect from 01-01-2006 in the scale of pay of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- The 6th Central Pay Commission recommended only Rs. 4200/- as Grade Pay to the post of Inspector CBDT/CBCE and other analogous post. However, the Inspector in CBDT/CBCE and Assistants in Central Secretariat were granted the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01-01-2006 as per Annexure A-9 and A-11 respectively. Therefore, the Inspector (Post) is entitled for equal treatment as that of the Inspectors in CBDT/CBCE and Assistants in CSS. 
          It is submitted that hierarchical structure is not at all a criteria for granting Grade Pay. As stated earlier in different department different hierarchical structure is adopted and the comparable posts are enjoying similar benefits. The averments to the effect that only Group B Posts in Department of Post are comparable to those of Group B posts in CSS/CBDT/CBEC is totally unsustainable for the reason that the comparable posts of Inspector (Post) is Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in Central Secretariat Service. The details of pay scale and Grade Pay recommended by 5th and 6th Central Pay Commission and accepted by the Government shown in paragraph 4 (Table above) of the rejoinder statement would prove contrary to the contentions of the respondents. The contention of the respondent that the Assistant Superintendent of Posts is given the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- which is the next higher post of Inspector (Post) and therefore, the Inspector (Post) is not entitled for Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- is unsustainable as some promotional posts in other Departments and feeder post are enjoying the same Grade Pay. For example, in Defence Accounts Department Sr. Accounts Officer is the feeder category for promotion to the post of Assistant Controller of Defence Accounts (ACDA) and both the posts are in the same Grade pay Rs.5400 in PB-3. Likewise, in the Postal Accounts Office (PAO) under the Department of Post, Senior Accounts Officer is the feeder post for promotion to the post of Assistant Chief Accounts Officer (ACAO) and both these posts are in the Grade pay Rs.5400 in PB-3. In Comptroller and Auditor General’s Officer, Senior Audit officer is the feeder post for promotion to the post of Assistant Accountant General(AAG) and the Grade pay is Rs 5400 in PB-3 for both these posts. Therefore, it will not lie in the mouth of the respondents to contend that the promotional post is in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- and therefore, the Inspector (Post) is not entitled for the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-. 
          It is submitted that when parity is brought out by the Pay Commission and Inspector (Post) and Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS is treated alike, the denial of equal grade pay would result in down grading the post of Inspector Post and the same is not permissible in law. It has been so held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others Vs. Debashis Kar and others reported in 1995 Supp (3) SCC 528. Admittedly, the Department of Post recommended the same pay scale of Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC to the Inspector (Post) before the 6th Central Pay Commission and the same was approved by the Pay Commission granting the same scale of pay and Grade Pay and therefore, the department cannot turn around and contend that the Inspector (Post) are not entitled for the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-.

Issue No.3 Nature of duties assigned to Assistants in CSS are different to that of Inspector Posts.

      Admittedly, the nature of duties assigned to Assistants in CSS are different from duties assigned to Inspector Posts since Assistants are office staff in Secretariat offices where as the Inspector Posts are the office staff in field. It is worthy to mention that 6th Central Pay Commission in Para 3.1.3 had recommended absolute parity in terms of hierarchical structure of office staff in field and Secretariat offices up to the level of Assistants and this recommendation was accepted by the Government. The above factual aspects were considered while issuing Annexure A-11 OM F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 16.11.2009 as indicated in paragraph 4 of Annexure A-11. Parity made and recommended by the Expert Body namely, the Pay Commission and accepted by the Government cannot be denied by the Department under any pretext.

Issue No.4 Pay scale of Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC was upgraded to Rs.6500-10500 on 21-04-2004 and merely recruited through direct recruitment from the same All India Competitive examination does bring any parity between Inspector Posts and Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC & Assistants in CSS.

        Admittedly the Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC were given the scale of pay of Rs. 6500-10500 on and from 21-04-2004 before the implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission Recommendations and the above scale of pay of Rs. 6500-10500 granted to the Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC was considered and the Pay Commission found absolute parity with the Inspector (Posts) and other analogous posts and that's why the Pay Commission recommended to grant the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs. 6500-10500 to the Inspector Post upgrading their scale of pay from Rs. 5500-9000. Since the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations were implemented only with effect from 01-01-2006 the scale of pay of Rs. 6500-10500 was granted to the Inspector Posts with effect from 01-01-2006 and not by an earlier date. Once the Pay Commission found parity with the analogous posts and recommended the same scale of pay the respondent cannot turn around and contend that the direct recruitment did not bring the Inspector Posts on par with the Inspectors in CBDT/CBCE. The Recruitment Rules were amended and element of direct recruitment was introduced only because of the recommendations of the 4th and 5th Central Pay Commission and based on the recommendation for bringing out parity by the Commission. The respondents are clearly overlooking the recommendation of the 4th pay commission in Paragraph 10.44, in which Inspector Posts were equated with inspectors in other Central Government organisations like customs and central excise and income tax and recommended to introduce direct recruitment to bring parity. The 5th pay commission also in paragraph 62.9 had granted the equal pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 with Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC with recommendation to introduce direct recruitment from the Inspectors Grade examination of Staff Selection Commission.

Issue No.5 Sub Inspectors in CBI  are also recruited through the same examination and are in the Grade of Rs.4200 only.

       Sub-Inspectors in CBI  cannot be compared with Inspectors of Department of Posts, as they are Sub-Inspectors in the lower cadre and they belong to Group C post. The Pay Commission also did not recommend any parity with Sub Inspectors of CBI to that of Inspector (Post), Inspectors in the CBDT/CBCE and Assistants in the Central Secretariat Service. It is relevant to note that all the Inspectors (Central Excise, Income Tax, Customs etc.) and Assistants recruited through the Combined Graduate level Examination, conducted by Staff Selection Commission, are granted Grade Pay of Rs.4600, except the Inspector Posts. It is ironical to state that, though the Inspector Posts are Group B non gazetted they are being denied the equal grade pay to that of some Group C Inspectors in other Departments like Inspectors in the Income Tax Department. The Inspectors in the Income Tax Department is allowed the Grade pay of Rs. 4600/- even though they are Group C post.

Thanks.
Permanand.