AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pradeep Kumar, Member (A)
Applicants herein are serving in the erstwhile Medical Council of India, which has now been constituted as National Medical Commission. The
applicants (total 13 in number) are aggrieved that the pay fixation given to them over years, has been objected to by the Audit Department and the
respondents have decided to refix their pay. This decision was impugned in this OA No.988/2020. Subsequently, in follow up of that decision,
respondents have also issued revised pay fixation orders on 27.10.2020 and 28.10.2020 though making it subject to the final decision in OA
No.988/2020.
The applicant also preferred MA No.1607/2020 seeking to file the OA jointly.
The applicants also preferred MA-2209/2020 seeking to substitute MCI with NMC, which is the successor body. This MA was allowed on 3.11.2020.
Applicants have also preferred another MA No.2712/2020 to bring on record legal heirs of applicant No.1, who has unfortunately died on 22.8.2020
while the OA was still pending adjudication. There has been 14 days delay in filing this MA No.2712/2020, and MA-2711/2020 has also been filed
seeking condonation of delay in MA-2712/2020.
The respondents have opposed MA-1607/2020 seeking to file joint application, pleading that the 13 applicants are working at different levels in the
organisation starting from Group-D to much higher levels and policy directives in respect of pay fixation as applicable to them are different.
Accordingly, OA is not maintainable, in the form as has been filed.
Matter has been heard.Applicantsare represented by Sh. Nalin Kohli, learned senior counsel with Sh. Asif Ahmed. Respondent No.1 is represented
by Sh. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel with Sh. T.Singhdev, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sh. Hanu Bhaskar, learned counsel
represented respondent No.2.
For the reasons stated therein, MA No.2711/2020 seeking condonation of delay is allowed. MA No.2712/2020, to bring the legal heirs of applicant
No.1 on record, is also allowed. Applicants may file amended memo of parties.
Applicants have also preferred MA No.2596/2020 seeking to stay the pay fixation orders issued by order dated 27.10.2020 and 28.10.2020. It is
noted that thesetwo pay fixation orders were not forming part of the original OA. It is also noted that they had been issued in follow up of the decision
by the Board of Governors of the erstwhile Medical Council of India and that decision of MCI was sought to be stayed in the initial OA.
The applicants also rely on a judgement in Rafique Masih (White washer) to plead that recoveries are not admissible.
MA No.1607/2020 for joining together is disallowed for the reasons that applicants belong to different levels in the organisation and policy directives
for their pay fixation may be different. The applicants do not not form a cohesive group.
At this point, learned counsel for applicant sought permission of the Court to withdraw the OA with liberty to file a better OA for the grievance
ventilated in this OA, by putting together only those applicants in each OA which form one cohesive group.
Applicant, however, pleaded that in the meanwhile, certain protection be given to them in the form that no coercive action be taken against the
applicants.
Respondents vehemently opposed any kind of interim protection to the applicants as OA itself is not maintainable in the present form for reasons
brought out in para 4 above.
Since joining together has been disallowed, the present OA is not maintainable in present form and is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
However, keeping in view the liberty sought for in para 9 above, further directions are in para 12 below.
Learned counsel for applicants seeks and are allowed three weeks time to submit better OA. In the meanwhile, respondents shall continue to pay
to the applicants at pay level, which has been assessed to be correct by the respondents. However, those payments shall be subject to the final
decision in the OAs, which need to be filed within the time allowed.