GRANTING MACP ON PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY-CASE NO. 1493/2014

Central Administrative Tribunal

Principal Bench

OA 1493/2014

New Delhi, this the 1st  day of May,  2014

Honble Shri Ashok Kumar, Member (A)

Honble Shri Raj Vir Sharma, Member (J)

1.            Indian Ordnance Factories Gaztted Officers

                Association through its President, Shri Brajesh

                Kumar Singh,

                S/o Late Shri Ram Datt Singh,

                Serving as Junior Works Manager,

                Small Arms Factory, Kanpur,

                Resident of 330, C-Block, Swaraj  Nagar,

                Panki, Kanpur-208020

2.            Iftikhar Jilani, Aged 47 years

                S/o Shri A.R.Khan

                R/o C-8/5, New Type-III

                Ordnance Factory Estate

                Raipur Dehradun-248008

3.            Man Mohan Garg, Aged 50 years

                S/o Late Shri Prem Chand Garg,

                R/o 46-type-III, North Estate

                Ordnance Factory, Muradnangar-201206

4.            Rishi Raj, Aged-49 Years

                S/o Late Shri Jograj

                R/o C-1/11,  New Type-III

                Ordnance Factory Estate

                Raipur, Dehradun-248008

5.            Shashi Bhushan Chaubey, Aged 46 years

                S/o Shri Srikrishna Chaubey

                R/o ET-24, Middle Road

                Armapur Estate, Kanpur-208009

6.            S.K. Mohd. Israil, Aged-53 Years

                S/o Seikh Dada Miyan

                R/o 59-B Type-III, Sector-3

                Ordnance Factory Chand-442501.

7.            Vivek Mungikar, Aged 50 years

                S/o Shri Vallabh Mungikar

                R/o House No.2-1-467, Street No.6,

                Nallkunta, Hyderabad-500044.

8.            Beeran Singh, Aged 50 Years

                S/o Shri Ratan Lal

                R/o 21-Type-V Bunglow, North Estate

                Ordnance Factory, Muradnagar-2011206.  Applicants

(Advocate: Shri M.K.Bhardwaj)

                                                Versus

UOI & Ors. through:

1.            The Secretary,

                Ministry of Defence,

                South Block, New Delhi.

2.            The Director General,

                Ordnance Factory Board,

                10-A, S.K. Bose Road,

                Kolkata-700001 (W.B.)

3.            The Secretary,

                DOP&T,

                North Block, New Delhi.                        .  Respondents.    

(By Advocate: Shri Rajinder Nischal)

                                       

 Order (oral)

By Honble Sh. Ashok Kumar, Member (A) :-

                MA has been filed under rule 4(5) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987 for joining together on the ground that the grievances of the applicants are the same and the same identical remedy is being sought by the applicant in this OA.  Having considered the MA and the arguments of Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, counsel for the applicant, MA is allowed.

2.            The grievance of the applicants is against the alleged arbitrary order of the respondents not giving them the Grade of Rs. 5400/- in PB-III, as given to other similarly placed persons appointed as Supervisor/Chargeman (Technical) vide OM dated 19.05.2009.  Applicant has sought the following reliefs in the OA :-

To declare the action of the respondents in not granting the Grade Pay of Rs.5400 and 6600 PB-3 to the applicants as given to similarly placed persons vide order dated 30.07.2011 and 02.04.2012 as illegal and arbitrary.

To direct  the respondents to grant Grade Pay of Rs.5400 and 6600 in PB-3 as 2nd & 3rd financial upgradation to the applicants under MACP from due date with all arrears of pay.              

 To declare the OM/MACP dated 19.05.2009 as unconstitutional to the extent the same deny the next promotional scale attached to the promotional post as 1st, 2nd & 3rd financial upgradation as illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.

To allow the O.A. with costs.

Pass such other direction or directions order or orders as this Honble Tribunal may deem fit and ends of justice.

3.            Learned counsel for the applicant, Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj, argued that the issue involved in this mater has been decided by this Tribunal in OA 988/2014 vide order dated 21.03.2014. The operative part of the said order reads as under:-

7.            In another O.A. No. 864/2014  Shri Om Prakash & Others v. Secretary (NCERT) decided by this Tribunal, the following directions were issued.

3.            In our considered view, once an order has been passed by this Tribunal and it has also been upheld at the level of Supreme Court, there is no question of waiting for an approval from any Govt. department for implementation of the same.  The respondents, therefore, should have considered the representations of the applicants on merits.

In view of the above position, we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with the direction to the respondent to consider the representations of the applicants in the light of the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 19387/201 (supra) as upheld by the Apex Court in CWP NO. 19387/2011 (supra)  as upheld by the Apex Court in SLP (CC) No. 7467/2013 (supra) and decide their cases under intimation to them.  The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.  There shall be no order as to costs.

 Learned counsel states that repeated representations have been filed by the applicants through the Association on 23.05.2011 and the earlier representation dated 31st October, 2013  is placed at Annexure A-12. Individual representation was also made by the applicant on 22.11.2013 for grant of MACP in the hierarchy on promotional basis. Counsel for the applicant submits that since the statutory period for remedy is not yet over, hence in terms of the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 in Section 20,  the respondents be directed to dispose of the long pending matter and to take a final decision after considering the afore-noted  Order of this Tribunal in OA 988/2014(supra). 

Shri Rajinder Nishcal, counsel for the respondents was also heard.  He submitted that the pending representation of the applicant will be disposed of expeditiously.

 We agree with the arguments of the learned counsel for both parties and accordingly direct the respondents to consider the applicants  representation in the light of the related  instructions and the scheme of MACP, and while doing so shall also keep in view the afore-noted order of this Tribunal.  Respondents shall thereafter, pass a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicants within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.  Any consequential action arising out of the aforesaid decision taken by respondents on the representation shall be regulated within a further period of eight weeks from the date of decision. 

OA is disposed of with afore-noted direction.

(Raj Vir Sharma)                                                 (Ashok Kumar)

Member (J)                                                           Member (A)

/sarita/