AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J):
This O.A. has been preferred by the applicants against the impugned O.M. bearing No. 8/52/2011-EC.III dated 19.07.2017, as well as against the impugned clarificatory letter bearing No. MoF(DoE) ID No. 689165/E.11(A)/2018 dated 06.07.2018 issued by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure and also against the impugned Office Memorandum No. 8/52/2011-EC.lll (Pt.) dated 06.09.2018 whereby it has been arbitrarily directed to all units of CPWD that no bunching benefit will be given at the time of fixation of pay of AE (Civil & Electrical), CPWD consequent upon upgradation of their pay scales from Rs. 6500 to Rs. 7450-11500 and impugned order bearing No. F.No. 8/07/2023-EC-III(A) dated 10.07.2023 issued by the O/o Director General, Govt. of India, CPWD, New Delhi rejecting the representations of Central PWD Engineers Association dated 18.10.2018 as well as 02.07.2020 holding that their request for extension of benefit of fixation of pay by applying the factor of 1.86 to Rs. 7450 (Rs. 7450-11500 pre-revised) as on 01.01.2006 along with benefit of bunching and further request for release of arrear, pay and allowances has been rejected in pursuance to compliance of the judgment dated 01.10.2018 passed in O.A. No. 3726/2018 by the C.A.T., Principal Bench, New Delhi (Central PWD Engineers Association -vs- Union of India & Others).
This O.A. is also made against the consequential impugned order dated 28.04.2023 issued by the O/o Director General, Govt. of India, CPWD, New Delhi rejecting the prayer of the CPWD Engineers Association declaring entitlement of payment of Rs. 7450 in the pay scale of Rs. 7450-11500 as exist in pay scale as on 01.01.2006 which is also contrary to the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure O.M. dated 13.11.2009, besides respondents have no jurisdiction to interfere with the benefit of pay fixation provided through statutory CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2008 and on that score alone all the impugned orders dated 19.07.2017, 06.07.2018, 06.09.2018, 10.07.2023 and 28.04.2023 are liable to be set aside and quashed with exemplary cost.
As per the applicants, they are similarly situated with the applicants of O.A. No. 141/2012, O.A. No. 143/2012 and O.A. No. 145/2012 of CAT Jaipur Bench and they are also entitled to the benefits of bunching of their pay on upgradation of their pay scale from Rs. 6500-10500 to Rs. 7450-11500 and also for fixation of their pay by applying the factor of 1.86 to Rs. 7450 (Rs. 7450-11500 pre-revised) as on 01.01.2006 in the corresponding pay band of Rs. 9300-34800 in PB-2 with grade pay of Rs. 4600 in terms of the illustration 4(A) of Rule 7 (1) of CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2008 and also in the light of the decision communicated by the respondents vide O.M. bearing No. 8/52/2011-EC.II dated 10.03.2017 with all consequential benefits including arrear monetary benefit w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in the light of the judgment and order dated 04.11.2016 passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in W.P. (C) No. 8058/2015 and CM 16635/2015 and also in the light of the decision rendered by the Learned C.A.T. Co-ordinate Bench, Jaipur on 28.02.2013 passed in O.A. No. 141/2012, O.A. No. 143/2012 and O.A. No. 145/2012.
As per the applicants, they are the Members of the Central P.W.D Engineers Association (a registered Association and recognized by the Govt. of India). The Director (Admin)-l, office of the Directorate General, CPWD, New Delhi with reference to the OM No. 8/52/2011-EC.lll dated 10.03.2017 had issued the impugned Office Memorandum bearing No. bearing No. 8/52/2011-EC.III dated 19.07.2017, wherein it had been informed that a large number of references have been received seeking clarifications relating to the application of the benefit of bunching of stages while fixing the pay of those AEs (C&E) whose scales have been upgraded from Rs. 6500-10500/- to Rs. 7450-11500/- in the pre-revised scale. It had been further informed that some of the offices have already extended the benefits on account of bunching based on OM dated 10.03.2017 and accordingly, it had been advised to all the offices of CPWD to put on hold till further orders. It had also been requested that if orders on account of bunching have already been issued by the offices but not implemented, the same may not be given effect to. Such a decision of the respondents is highly arbitrary, ex facie illegal and opposed to the law of the land, as such said impugned O.M. dated 19.07.2017 is also liable to be set aside and quashed.
The Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure by impugned clarificatory letter bearing No. MoF(DoE) ID No. 689165/E.III(A)/2018 dated 06.07.2018 has informed the Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi wherein it is stated that the grade pay of Rs. 4600 corresponding to the scale of Rs. 7450-115000 should not be extended w.e.f. 01.01.2006 since the said pay scale of Rs. 7450-11500 is a pre-revised pay scale provided prior to 01.01.2006 and further stated that there is no question of bunching of pay in the above said pay fixation by way of upgradation of pay which is contrary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance circular dated 13.11.2009 and on that score alone the clarificatory communication dated 06.07.2018 also liable to be set aside and quashed along with the impugned O.M. dated 06.09.2018 and impugned order dated 10.07.2023.
By filing written statement, respondents have raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the OA as the applicants have not exhausted the available remedies prior to approaching this Tribunal as per Section 20 of Administrative Tribunals Act. As per the provisions of AT Act, any aggrieved employee must prefer representation before the concerned authority. However, the applicants have not preferred any representation. The applicants had challenged the impugned speaking order dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure-A4) and 28.04.2024 (Annexure-A5) issued to the Central PWD Engineers Association, New Delhi in compliance of the order dated 01.10.2018 of the CAT, Principal Bench in OA No. 3726/2018. As per the respondents, said Central PWD Engineers Association had already approached before the CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi through it's General Secretary by challenging the said two speaking orders dated 10.07.2023 (Annexure-A4) and 28.04.2024 (Annexure-A5) in an O.A. No. 3302/2023. These facts were suppressed in this instant OA by the applicants.
The respondents have also raised objection by stating that the instant OA is not maintainable due to non-joinder of necessary party. The applicants are seeking quashing and setting aside of the clarificatory letter dated 06.07.2018 (Annexure-A/2) issued by the under secretary, Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance but the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance has not been made as party.
Respondents pleads that the fixation of pay has been done exactly as per 6th CPC guidelines on the basis of para (i) of section -I of Part C of schedule I, Note 2A, Rule 7(1)(A)(i) and (ii) illustration 4A of CCS(RP) Rule 2008 (Annexure-R-1), further clarification issued by Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance vide OM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 13.10.2008 (Annexure-R-2) and in consultation with Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance. Thereafter this Directorate issued OM No. 8/52/2011-EC-III dated 06.09.2018 (Annexure-R-3). The relevant paras 3 & 4 of the said OM are reproduced below:
"3.As per Note 2A read with illustration 4A of Rules 7 of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008, the revised pay of AE (Civil & Electrical) CPWD who are in the prerevised scale of Rs. 6500-10500 and their pay scale has been upgraded to Rs.7450-11500 will be fixed by multiplying the factor of 1.86 (rounded off to nearest ten) and thereafter to add the Grade pay of Rs. 4600/- corresponding to upgraded pre-revised scale of 7450-11500. There is no question of bunching of pay in the above said pay fixation. 4. Therefore, it is directed that all units of CPWD may review the pay fixation of AE (Civil & Electrical) previously done and fix the revised pay of Asstt. Engineer (Civil & Electrical) strictly as per methodology explained above, which is in consonance with CCS(RP) Rules,2008. No bunching is to be given in this regard."
As it has been clarified by the DoE, the said anomaly has been corrected by the respondent department to the effect that bunching benefits are not admissible to AEs working in CPWD.
Further, as per notification of CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, the pay fixation was to be done in accordance with Note 2 below Rule 7 of the notification. Therefore, it was required to fix the pay of the applicants w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as per Note 2A and Clause (A)(i)&(ii) of Rules 7(1) and illustration 4A of aforesaid CCS (RP) Rules, 2008. The Rules 7(A)(i) and (ii) of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 are reproduced below:
“(A)in the case of all employees: -
i.the pay in the pay band/pay scale will be determined by multiplying the existing pay as on 01.01.2006 by a factor of 1.86 and rounding off the resultant figure to the next multiple of 10.
ii.If the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale is more than the amount arrived at as per (i) above, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale."
The Note 2(A) below Rule 7 of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 dated 29.08.2008 states that –
"Note 2AWhere a post has been upgraded as a result of the recommendation of the 6th CPC as indicated in Part B or Part C of the First Schedule of these Rules, the fixation of pay in the applicable pay band will be done in the manner prescribed in accordance with Clause (A)(i) and (ii) of Rule 7 by multiplying the existing basic pay as on 01.01.2006 by a factor of 1.86 and rounding the resultant figure to the next multiple of ten. The grade pay corresponding to the upgraded scale as indicated in Column 6 of Part B or C will be payable in addition."
As per the Note 2A above, the fixation of pay will be done by multiplying the existing basic pay in the pre-revised scale (Rs. 6500-10500) with 1.86 (rounded to the nearest multiple of 10). In the case of the applicants, the pre-revised scale is 6500-10500/-.
Respondents have also referred 4A and state that the pay fixation in cases where posts have been upgraded e.g. posts in pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 3050-75-3950-80-4590 to Rs. 3200-85-4900 scale -
1.Existing Scale of Pay - Rs. 3050-4590 (Corresponding Grade Pay Rs. 1900)
2.Pay Band applicable - PB-1 Rs. 5200-20200
3.Upgraded to the scale of Pay Rs. 3200-4900 (Corresponding Grade Pay Rs. 2000)
4.Existing basic pay as on 01.01.2006 - Rs. 3125
5.Pay after multiplication by a factor of 1.86 - Rs. 5813 (Rounded off to Rs. 5820)
6.Pay in the pay Band PB-2 Rs. 5820
7.Pay in the pay band after including benefit of bunching in the pre-revised scale of Rs.3050-4590, if admissible - Rs. 6060
8.Grade Pay attached to the scale of Rs. 2000 Rs. 3200-4900 – Rs/ 2000
9.Revised basic pay-total of pay in the Existing Pay band (3050-4590) and grade pay of Rs. 1900 – Rs. 8060.
From the above, it is evident that the pay is to be fixed after multiplication of existing basic pay as on 01.01.2006 by a factor of 1.86 (rounded off to nearest multiple of 10). It doesn’t mention that this pay should be at par or above the minimum of the upgraded pay scale. The table of pre-revised scale Rs. 3050-75-3950-80- 4950 (as per fitment table S-5 provided with DoE OM Dated 30.08.2008) has Rs. 6060 as the revised pay in the pay band in row 2, against the pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 3125. The pre-revised basic pay of Rs. 3125 has been revised to Rs. 6060 after allowing an additional amount due to the bunching benefit.
Later in this regard, a detailed explanation was issued by Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance vide an OM dated 13.10.2008, wherein the method of pay fixation has been given for fixation of pay in the pay bands where posts have been upgraded as a result of recommendations of 6th CPC. The relevant paras are reproduced below:
"2.Accordingly, in cases of upgradation of posts as a result of recommendations of 6 CPC, the fitment table attached with OM of even number dated 30.08.2008, corresponding to the prerevised scale shall be used for the purpose of determination of pay in the pay band. To the pay in the so determined, the grade pay corresponding to the upgraded post is to be added. This will be the revised pay of the Government servant who has been upgraded as a result of 6th CPC recommendation.
3.To illustrate, CPMF Constables have been upgraded from pre-revised scale of Rs. 3050-4590 to the pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900 corresponding to the grade pay Rs. 2000 in PB-1. In the case of a CPMF Constable drawing the basic pay of Rs. 3575 as on 01.01.2006, his pay in the pay band will be fixed in accordance with the fitment table of the pre-revised scale of Rs.3050-4590. Hence, his revised pay in the pay band will be Rs. 6650 as per the table corresponding to the pre-revised scale of Rs. 3050-4590. To this, the Grade pay of Rs. 2000 corresponding to the upgraded pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900 will be added. Consequently, his revised basic pay would be Rs. 8650(corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale of 3050-4590) as on 01.01.2006.
4.The above procedure is to be adopted in all cases where pay scales has been upgraded by the Pay Commission, including Constabulary and ranks in the CPMFs/CPOs, Postmen and similar cadres in Department of Posts, Assistants and Section Officers in the Secretariat and other headquarter organization and the common category cadres of Teachers and Nurses. This list is illustrative and not exhaustive"
As clarified by the DoE, Ministry of Finance OM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 13.10.2008, the fitment table applicable in case of the applicants is table S-12.
Furthermore, in the case of applicants the revised pay obtained after multiplying existing basic pay of Rs. 6500 with 1.86 (and rounded off to the nearest 10) is Rs. 12090. This amount is not less than the minimum revised pay as prescribed in the fitment table S-12. Thus, this pay does not need to be enhanced to RS. 13860 as claimed by the applicants. The pay of the applicants is to be fixed from the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 to the new pay structure and not from the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 to the pay scale Rs.7450-11500 and then to the new pay structure. The pay fixation of the applicants is to done as per the fitment table S-12 with the applicable grade pay of Rs. 4600 and not as table S-13 as claimed by the applicants. In accordance with the guidelines as submitted, the benefit of increment due to bunching does not become admissible to the applicants. Applicants’ contention that initial fixation of pay as on 01.01.2006 should be corresponding to the minimum initial revised pay under the pay scale of Rs. 7450-11500/- is incorrect. It is due to an incorrect interpretation of the rules that the bunching benefits to AEs were granted which in the first place did not exist. This wrong interpretation of rules does not create a vested right in any person to claim the benefit of the same. Thus, the respondents pray for dismissal of the instant O.A. In support of his contentions, respondents have placed reliance the Order dated 30.10.2024 passed by CAT, Chennai Bench in O.A. No. 310/00420/2015. They have also placed reliance a common order dated 26.03.2026 passed by CAT, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru in O.A. Nos. 213/2023, 396/2024 and 601/2024.
Sri M. Chanda, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A. Kundu, learned Addl. CGSC for the respondents are heard and all the documents have been perused.
During argument, learned counsel for the applicants has placed the following cases:
Judgment and order dated 14.12.1999 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 5363-64 of 1997 in the case of S.I Rooplal and Ors. Vs. Governor through Chief Secretary, Delhi and Ors.
Judgment and order dated 23.06.2026 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Guwahati Bench Guwahati in the case of Harilal Prasad versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 28.02.2013 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in the case of S.C. Sharma versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 04.11.2016 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C) No 8058/2015 & CM 16635/2015 in the case of Union of India & Ors versus Malbika Deb Gupta.
Judgment and order dated 14.10.2013 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench, Ernakulam in O.A No 656/2012 in the case of P. R. Anandvally Amma versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 13.07.2012 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench, Ernakulam in O.A No 856/2011 in the case of K.K. Vijayan versus The Principal Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
Judgment and order dated 08.04.2016 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench, Ernakulam in O.A No 425/2015 in the case of Sri K.N. Vijayakumaran Nair versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 14.09.2018 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Guwahati Bench Guwahati in the case of Shri Chandan Das versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 01.10.2018 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi, in O.A No 3726/2018 in the case of Central PWD Engineers Association versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 17.07.2023 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi, in C.P No 371/2022 in the case of Central PWD Engineers Association versus Union of India & Ors.
Judgment and order dated 06.2023 passed by the Hon'ble CAT Guwahati Bench Guwahati in the case of Gojen Taye versus Union of India & Ors.
The aforesaid precedents have been perused and taken on record. We have carefully examined the conflicting legal interpretations presented by the parties regarding the calculation of bunching benefits and the application of Rule 7(1) of the CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2008. In O.A. No. 141/2012 and connected matters (S.C. Sharma Vs. Union of India and Ors.), the Co-ordinate Bench of CAT, Jaipur vide order dated 28.02.2013, has held as under:
“.… respondents are directed to grant benefit of bunching to the applicants as per illustration 4A of Rule 7(i) of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 which is equal to 3% of Pay Band + Corresponding grade pay and after granting benefit of bunching as per rules, as indicated above, the respondents are further directed to make payment of arrears to the applicants after the exercise undertaken for correct pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006. It is further made clear that the entire exercise is supposed to be undertaken: expeditiously, but in case not later than a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
Aforesaid order of S.C. Sharma (supra) was thoroughly discussed by another Co-ordinate Bench of CAT, Bengalore Bench wherein similar issue for grant of bunching benefits in terms of Rule 7(1)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 and the Illustrations 4A/4B was adjudicated in O.A. Nos. 231/2023, 396/2024 and 601/2024 in the case of Mallikarjun Vazirappa Vs. Union of India and Ors., which were dismissed vide detailed common order dated 26.03.2026 as follows:
“The issue involved in S.C. Sharma, supra, before Jaipur Bench of this Tribunal relates to upgradation of the pay scale of the Technical Officers from Rs. 6500-10500/- to Rs. 7450-11500/- corresponding to the revised Pay Band PB 2 of Rs. 9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-with effect from 01.01.2006 under the provisions of the Rules. The representations filed by the applicants therein having been turned down by passing a speaking order in compliance with the directions issued in the OA filed earlier, the applicant in S.C. Sharma filed OA No. 141/2012. The main ground of challenge was that the pay was not fixed as per Illustration 4A.
In that context, Jaipur Bench of this Tribunal setting aside the so called speaking order directed the respondents to grant benefit of bunching to the applicants therein, as per Illustration 4A of 7 (i) of the Rules which is equal to 3% of Pay Band plus corresponding Grade Pay and after granting benefit of bunching as per Rules, as indicated, the respondents were further directed to make payment of arrears to the applicants after the exercise undertaken for correct pay scale with effect from 01.01.2006. In arriving at the decision, this Tribunal has observed that it appears, the applicants pay has been fixed in accordance with Fitment Table provided in OM dated 30.08.2008 which is totally incorrect because this Fitment Table is applicable to normal replacement and not to the cases of merger or upgradation as in the case of the applicants therein. The relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
“13.Further, the applicants are able to show before us relying upon Appendix-A which has been placed on record alongwith the reply filed by the respondents and more particularly referred clause-7 in which pay in the pay band after including benefit of bunching in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 3050-4590, if admissible has been mentioned. Beyond this term, in the appendix the respondents have manipulated to write down fixed by referring to fitment table given in Annexure I corresponding to the existing pay scale. We are fully satisfied that above referred addition in Clause-7 has been introduced by the respondents deliberately to deny the correct fixation of pay and has wrongly fixed pay of the applicants.
14.We have thoroughly considered the relevant rules and the OMs as well as the appendices and illustration given in the rules and upon consideration it appears that the applicants pay has been fixed in accordance with fitment table provided in OM dated 30.8.2008 which is totally incorrect because this fitment table is applicable to normal replacement and not to the cases of merger or upgradation as in the case of the applicants.
15.In view of the observations made hereinabove, we are fully satisfied with the submissions made on behalf of the applicants and we deem it proper to quash and set-aside the order dated 12.12.2011 (Ann.A/1) and order vide which pay of the applicants have been wrongly fixed without giving benefit of bunching. The respondents are directed to grant benefit of bunching to the applicants as per illustration 4A of Rule 7(i) of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 which is equal to 3% of Pay Band + Corresponding grade pay and after granting benefit of bunching as per rules, as indicated above, the respondents are further directed to make payment of arrears to the applicants after the exercise undertaken for correct pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006. It is further made clear that the entire exercise is supposed to be undertaken expeditiously, but in case not later than a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
22.Clarification issued by the Government of India to Note 2A and the Illustration provided therein as well as RBE No. 172/2008 were not brought to the notice of this Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in S.C. Sharma, supra. Hence, relying on Para 2 (ii) of the OM dated 30.08.2008, S.C. Sharma case, supra, has been decided merely applying the illustration 4A to all the upgradation cases.
23.The subsequent decisions in Harilal, Maganti Ramana Kumar and A.S.R. Murthy, supra, have been rendered following S.C. Sharma, supra. There is no cavil with the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- applicable to the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 in terms of the OM dated 13.11.2009.
24.For the reasons stated in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the considered view that illustration 4A is specific to the pay of Rs. 3125/- which gets bunched i.e., gets fixed in the revised pay structure at the same stage with Rs. 3050/- in the existing scale of Rs. 3050-4590/-. The word ‘admissible’ employed in Illustration 4A & 4B plays a pivotal role to calculate the bunching benefits. In our view, it cannot be ignored. To selectively take an illustration specific to a particular rate of pay in the existing pay scale and uniformly applying it to all rates of pay is not appropriate and the same would be inconsistent with the Rules. The employees would be eligible for bunching, if admissible and not by default. It is clear from the language of Note 2A that it is only the grade pay corresponding to the upgraded pay scale will be given and not the upgraded pay itself. Note 2A deals with upgradation and Note 2B with merger. In case of Note 2B, merged Grade Pay is applicable not the merged pay scale. Note 2A speaks of fixation as at Illustration 4A in the explanatory memorandum but Note 2A cannot be read in isolation since Government of India’s decision contains a clarification to Note 2A. This clarification clearly states that in cases of upgradation, the fitment table attached with OM dated 30.08.2008 corresponding to the pre-revised scale shall be used for the purpose of determination of pay in the pay band and to this, Grade Pay corresponding to the upgraded post is to be added. This will be the revised pay of the government servant who has been upgraded as a result of 6th CPC. Illustration 4A takes an example where bunching was a possibility. This need not be the case always.
25.At the cost of repetition, we observe that in normal replacement the fitment table with Grade Pay provided therein, is added to arrive at the revised pay but in the case of upgradation, Grade Pay applicable to the upgraded pay is added not the pay in the pay band of the upgraded scale as per Illustration 4A to Note 2A. Normal Grade Pay for Rs. 3125/- in the fitment table is Rs. 1900/- but for upgradation Grade Pay of Rs. 2000/- applicable to the upgraded pay is added. This is 4A. Rule 7 (1) (A) (i) envisages for determining the pay in the pay band/pay scale multiplying the existing basic pay as on 01.01.2006 by a factor of 1.86 and rounding of the resultant figure to the next multiple of 10. Ist proviso appended to (i) and (ii) of Rule 7 (1) (a) carves out an exception that where in the fixation of pay, the pay of Railway Servants drawing pay at two or more consecutive stages in an existing scale gets bunched, i.e., gets fixed in the revised pay structure at the same stage in the pay band, then for every two stages so bunched, benefit of one increment (3% on the pay in the pay band) shall be given. This benefit is only to alleviate bunching and is not automatic. Moreover, in the present set of facts Illustration 4B is applicable. As per the Illustration 4B, no bunching benefit is given with respect to Rs. 5600/-, the basic pay as on 01.01.2006. This is only illustrative and not exhaustive. In case of Illustration 4B, Grade Pay of merged pay scale is applicable whereas in Illustration 4A, Grade Pay corresponding to the upgraded post will be granted. This may vary from case to case depending upon the basic pay as on 01.01.2006. Even assuming Illustration 4A is applicable for the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500/-, no bunching benefit is available as discussed in the preceding paragraphs. The calculation of the applicants are misplaced. Hence, the applicants are not entitled to bunching benefits as claimed.
26.For the reasons aforesaid, OAs lack merit, accordingly stand dismissed.”
In a comprehensive common order dated 26.03.2026, the coordinate Bench at Bangalore dismissed identical claims. The Bangalore Bench established that Illustration 4A is specific to a particular rate of pay (Rs. 3,125/-) that gets compressed or "bunched" at the same stage as Rs. 3,050/- in the existing scale of Rs. 3,050–4,590/-. It ruled that an illustration tailored to a specific rate cannot be uniformly applied across the board to all rates of pay by default.
This Bench finds itself in agreement with the detailed reasoning of the Bangalore Bench’s order dated 26.03.2026 (supra). The language of Note 2A and the accompanying government clarifications make it clear that in cases of pay scale upgradation under the 6th CPC, the fitment tables corresponding to the pre-revised scale must be utilized to determine the core pay in the pay band. To this amount, the higher Grade Pay corresponding to the upgraded post (Rs. 4,600/-) is added to arrive at the final revised pay.
In view of the applicable statutory guidelines and the clarifying principles established by the coordinate Bench at Bangalore (supra), the applicants have failed to demonstrate any structural or legal error in their pay fixation. The instant O.A. does not merit interference and is accordingly dismissed. Pending M.A., if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs.