AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Hon’ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne (J):
Ld Counsel for the applicants is present.
Ld Counsel Mr. T K Chatterjee appears for the respondents. He files his memo of appearance which is taken on record.
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-
“a)An order commanding the respondents each one of them and their men, agents, assigns and subordinates to consider representations of your applicants and to take independent decision on the grievance raised by the applicants in their respective representations;
b)An order commanding the respondents each one of them and their men, agents, assigns and subordinates to certify and transmit to this Hon'ble Tribunal all records relating to the OM No. 6/37/98-IC dated 21st April 2004 and also records pertaining to the decisions of the Anomaly Committee and acceptance thereof by the Government dated 22nd September 2023, so that conscionable justice may be rendered by setting aside and quashing the same;
c)Mandatory order commanding the respondents each one of them and their men, agents, assigns and subordinates to implement the Central Administrative Tribunalrecommendation made by the Special Anomaly Committee for similarly circumstances and/or similarly placed employees;
d)Mandatory order commanding the respondents each one of them and their men, agents, assigns and subordinates to upgrade the pay-scale of your applicants from 1.1.1996 on notional basis, and disburse arrears from 21.4.2004 onwards;
e)Any other appropriate direction/directions and/or order/orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”
MA/676/2026, filed by the applicants under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987 is allowed on being satisfied with the grounds therein.
Ld Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are aggrieved with the invidious discrimination in giving effect to the revised Pay scales in case of the applicants prospectively. He submits that in the case of other similarly circumstanced employees belonging to the same Department and in other Government Departments their pay has been revised on notional basis w.e.f. 01.01.1996 whereas the applicants have been given the benefit of the revised scale of pay with prospective effect i.e. from 21.04.2004. The applicants worked as inspectors in the Income Tax Department within the period from 1.1.1998 to 21.04.2004 after submitting their technical resignation from the post of inspector in the Department of Central Excise. The applicants worked as Inspector in Central Excise Department in the year 1996 and worked till the date of joining as Income Tax Officer with pay fixation calculated after taking into account the past service period as Inspector in Central Excise. Pursuant to the direction given by the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in WPCT No. 21 of 2015, Special Anomaly Committee recommended the issue to accord benefit from 01.01.1996 instead of 21.04.2004. On the basis of the recommendations of the Special Anomaly Committee, Central Government extended the benefit of enhanced pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 on notional basis to some officers of the Department of Income Tax with whom your applicants are similarly circumstanced, by way of, communicating Order No. F. No: C-18011/ASHISCHAKRABORTY/2009/VNL/2009/4743, dated 22.09.2023. Pursuant to the said judgment and order, this Hon'ble Court at Calcutta has passed several orders in favour of the similarly placed employees working under Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. The applicants being similarly situated have also made individual representation dtd. 17.03.2025 followed by representation dtd. 26.09.2025. However, the claim of the applicants has not been considered till date. Hence this OA.
Ld Counsel for the applicants prays for a direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the applicants and to extend the benefit of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in WPCT 21 of 2015 and order passed by the Govt. of India dtd. 22.09.2023, as the applicants herein are also similarly situated.
Ld Counsel for the respondents vehemently objects to the prayer made by the Ld Counsel for the applicants. He submits that the OA is hopelessly barred by limitation and the applicants herein are fence-sitters.
Heard.
The competent respondent authority is directed to examine and consider the pending representations of the applicants, treating this OA as a part of them, in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in WPCT 21 of 2015 and order/letter passed by the Govt. of India dtd. 22.09.2023 and communicate the decision to the applicants within 04 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case. All points for consideration are kept open.
Accordingly, the OA is disposed of. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of. No cost.