Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2019) 03 CAT CK 0068

Ram Kishor vs Union Of India Through Secretary I

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 6 March 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
L. Narasimh Reddy, J · Mohd. Jamshed, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 137 Of 2013

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 367 words

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

1.

The applicant was inducted in the Railways as Security Patrolling w.e.f. 03.11.1984 on daily wages. Thereafter, he was engaged as Casual Labour Gangman w.e.f. 15.06.1989. He was transferred to Carriage and Wagon Wing on being declared surplus. It is stated that he has been re-appointed as Safaiwala in the grade of 750-940.

2.

This OA is filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to re-fix his pay on par with that of the 4th respondent, i.e. Shri Mahavir (performa party). He contends that both of them were on the same footing and there is no basis in denying him the benefit, that was extended to the 4th respondent through an order dated 29.07.2011.

3.

The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit opposing the OA. According to them, the case of the applicant is in no way comparable with that of the 4th respondent, since the latter was on continuous duty in the same post, whereas in case of applicant, there were breaks and changes.

4.

We heard Shri Anil Singal, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Kripa Shankar Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents.

5.

The applicant claims parity of pay scale in comparison with that of the 4th respondent. For this purpose, it becomes necessary to plead and establish that the applicant stands on the same footing as does the 4th respondent. Such a comparison was not undertaken. Added to that, in the recent past, there was a substantial restructuring of the entire establishment, leading to abolition of certain categories of posts. The re-fixation of the pay scale of the 4th respondent was on the basis of an order issued by the Tribunal in an OA filed by him. Under these circumstances, it is difficult for us to grant any relief straightaway.

6.

We, therefore, dispose of the OA leaving it open to the applicant to make a representation to the respondents, duly indicating the reasons in support of his claim. As and when such representation is made, the respondents shall pass an order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.