AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Shri Satyajit Mukerji, counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, counsel for the respondents are present and heard.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has prayed for direction to the respondents to grant the pay and allowances as per the calculation made in the case of one Surendra Prasad Mishra as due to wrong calculation by the respondents, the applicant has been suffering a loss of Rs.10,000/- per month. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was finally promoted as Master Craftsman/Level-6 on 29.11.2017 in the grade pay of Rs.4200/-, however, the aforesaid promotion order was issued in pursuance of the directions given by this Tribunal on 10.03.2022, in August, 2022. For the aforesaid period of 56 months, instead of granting Rs.800/- per day towards travelling allowance, the applicant has been paid Rs.500/- per day and due to loss of Rs.300/- per day, the applicant has suffered a loss of Rs.87,990/-. He further submitted that the applicant has been paid less allowances in comparison to Surendra Prasad Mishra. Counsel for the applicant submitted that this wrong calculation, which was done in the year 2022, affected the applicant in every promotion. He also submitted that while calculating the pay and allowances of the workers of S & T Department of the Construction Organization, the method of calculation, as was done in the case of Surendra Prasad Mishra, was not followed in the case of applicant. Accordingly against the non-payment of appropriate allowance, the applicant has moved a representation dated 29.06.2026, which is pending for consideration. Counsel for the applicant submitted that at this stage, the applicant will be satisfied if a direction is given by this Tribunal to the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 29.06.2026 within the stipulated period of time.
Counsel for the respondents objected that the benefit sought by the applicant is barred by period of limitation and the applicant has to approach this Tribunal earlier as the grievance is related to the year 2017.
It appears from the aforesaid pleadings that the applicant has approached this Tribunal for promotion to Group ‘C’ post by fixing his lien in Group ‘C’ by way of O.A. No. 1494/2011, which was allowed by this Tribunal with the following directions: -
7.Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed with a direction to the respondents to pass a categorical order that the applicant is a Group ‘C’ employee and holds his lien including all the rights and consequential benefits available to Group ‘C’ employees with effect from the date he got promotion to such post i.e. 06.02.1998. The aforesaid direction be complied with by the respondents within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. No order as to cost.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that once the applicant’s lien from Group ‘D’ post to Group ‘C’ post is changed, the cause of action arises only after placing his lien in Group ‘C’ post. Therefore, there is no delay in filing the O.A.
After considering the submission of counsel for the parties and the Order dated 10.03.2022 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1494/2011, I am of the opinion to dispose of the O.A. at the admission stage itself with direction upon the respondent No. 5/competent authority amongst the respondents to consider the representation dated 29.06.2026 of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. With the aforesaid direction, O.A. stands disposed of. All the pending MAs shall be deemed to have been disposed of. No order as to cost.