AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mohan Pyare, Member (A)
Present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
“a) The Respondents may be directed to upgrade the various posts and enhance pay scale of CGST/IGST officers in CBEC (now CBIC) at par with the state government officers under GST for perfect implementation and furtherance of GST from the date since when the officers of State GST have been upgraded/redesignated and placed in higher pay scales in the interest of revenue and to save CGST/IGST officers from gross humiliation, disgrace and demoralization in comparison to SGST officers.
b) Enhance the pay scale of the Superintendents of CGST/IGST to Level-10 at par with the counterparts of State GST from the date since when their counterparts of State GST have been placed in higher pay scales.
c) And OR may pass such other and further orders/directions deem fit and proper in the facts of the case.”
Brief facts of this case are that applicant no. 1 is the association of Customs and Central excise/CGST gazetted executive officers and its members are from the rank and post of Superintendents and above. Applicant no. 1 represented through its Secretary General Mr. Ravi Malik, who is Assistant Commissioner (Central Excise/CGST and Customs) and is also an affected party, for up-gradation /re-designation under GST like state Government who have already upgraded the post by one rank for their officers. Applicant no.1 also submitted grievance petition online (Registration No.PMOPG/E/2017/0618323 dated 04.12.17 and PMOPG/E/2018/ 0148615 dated 02.05.2018) and several other petitions were submitted to concerned authorities but the respondents have not decided the same till date. The grievance petition PMOPG/E/2017/ 0618323 dated 04.12.2017 was forwarded to the Director Ad. IVA of CBIC by the Under Secretary, Ad.IIA of CBIC for necessary action but no action has been taken till date. The grievance petition PMOPG/E/2018/0148675 dated 02.05.2018 was also forwarded to the Director Ad. IVA of CBIC by the Director Ad. IIA & B of CBIC for necessary action but no action has been taken till date on it also.
We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the State Govt. upgraded (some even before the GST and some after the implementation) the various posts under GST by one rank for their officers and also granted higher pay scale for efficient implementation of GST but the Central Govt. neither upgraded the post under GST nor granted any higher pay scale to its officials. The pay scale of the Superintendent level officers, i.e. CTOs, is equivalent to the Level- 10 in the State GST. The CTOS (the counterparts of Superintendent of Central Excise in state GST) have further been re- designated/upgraded as Asstt. Commissioner along with already being placed in a pay scale equivalent to Level-10. He states that this is an arbitrary disparity. Learned counsel for the applicants argues that several representations and petitions have been filed with the aforesaid grievance at various levels including the office of Hon’ble Prime Minister of India but no action has been taken till date.
Submission of learned counsel for the respondents is that the department of revenue is not competent to take any policy decision on pay anomaly between the Centre and the State. The relief sought by the applicants falls within the allocated business of the Department of Personnel & Training and it is not within the competence of the Department of Revenue. The Association has also not enclosed or indicated any particular implementation order of any State Government and even if the orders are produced the issue needs to be examined in consultation with the Department of Personnel & Training and Department of Expenditure.
We have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire documents on record.
The relief claimed by the applicants’ association in the matter is regarding direction for upgradation of post and enhancement of pay at par with state government officers.The applicants are aggrieved with the fact that there is a pay disparity between the central and state level officers of the same department and rank, and have sought to be given similar benefits. In this respect it would be apt to remember that the Indian Constitution recognizes the federal structure, with states having their own autonomy which includes setting pay scales for their employees based on their specific needs and resources. While the principle of "equal pay for equal work" is a constitutional guarantee, the specific application and extent of its application between central and state government employees is subject to interpretation and depends on various factors including the financial capacity of the respective governments. Furthermore, the relief as claimed in this case is a policy matter of the department/ministry which needs to be discussed, decided and taken action upon in consultation with the Department of Expenditure. There are differences in the rank and pay structures between the State and Central level departments. While the employees of central government can demand parity with the state level officers and vice versa, there is no such provision regarding equal pay structures for state and the centre. The applicants have not produced any document on the basis of which the relief claimed by them can be allowed. Moreover, a Tribunal, being a quasi-judicial body, cannot dictate policy matters which is the exclusive domain of the executive. In view of the aforesaid discussion, any interference or direction in the present matter is beyond the scope of this Tribunal and the O.A. is liable to be dismissed as such.
Accordingly, the O.A. stands dismissed. All associated M.A.s also stand disposed of accordingly. No costs.