Shri S. M. Kathote vs The President Of India & Ors.

O R D E R

“In terms of the order dated 18.07.2025, learned counsel for the applicants’ states that he has filed the amended memo of parties, the same is taken on record.

2.

With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties the matter is taken up for final hearing.

3.

The present O.A. has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following reliefs:-

“8.

i) declare the action of the respondents in not extending the benefits of letter/order dated 22.09.2023 Issued by Respondents, which was upheld by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad vide order dated 09.08.2024 and Supreme Court vide Order dated 28.02.2025, to the applicants, as illegal and arbitrary;

ii) direct the respondents to extend the benefit of letter/order dated 22.09.2023, issued by Respondents, which was upheld by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad vide order dated 09.08.2024 and Supreme Court vide Order dated 28.02.2025, to the applicants, as has already been extended to 25 officers (13 from West Bengal, 2 from Odissa and 10 from Kerala); with all consequential benefits and further direct the respondents to fix the pay of 41 Item No. 5 O.A. No. 2233/2025 Court No. V each of the applicants with effect from 01.01.1996 or the date of joining as Income Tax Inspector (whichever is later) in the revised higher scale in terms of OM dated 21.04.2004 with actual benefits with effect from 21.04.2004;

(iii)

direct the respondents to fix the pay of those applicants who were performing the duties of Income Tax Officer on 01.01.1996 or promoted to the grade of Income Tax Officer whichever is later, in the revised higher scale with effect from 01.01.1996 or the date of promotion to the rank of Income Tax Officer with actual monetary benefits with effect from 21.04.2004 in terms of order dated 22.09.2023;

(iv)

direct the respondents to pay the arrears from 21.04.2004 to the applicants as a result of notional pay fixation with effect from 01.01.1996 or the date of joining as Income Tax Inspector (whichever is later) in the revised higher scale within a specified time, in terms of order dated 22.09.2023;

(v)

direct the respondents to pay the arrears from 21.04.2004 to the applicants as a result of notional pay fixation with effect from 01.01.1996 or the date of joining as Income Tax Officer (whichever is later) in the revised higher scale within a specified time, in terms of order dated 22.09.2023;

(vi)

direct the respondents to pay interest @10% p.a., if the notional benefit along with arrears as prayed above is not granted within the time specified;

(vii)

award the cost of the litigation; and

(viii)

pass such other or further order/s as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

4.

Learned counsel for the parties state that the present matter can be disposed of in terms of the order passed by the respondents on 27.06.2025.

4.1.

It is also noticed that on 30.05.2025, the following order was passed:-

“Learned counsel for the applicant hand over a copy of an Office order dated 17.05.2025, which reads as under:

"Subject: Implementation of the Hon'ble High Court, Kerala Order dated 16 01 2024 passed in O.P (CAT) No. 1/2023 filed by Sh. R. Prasannakumaran Nair & others for granting enhanced pay scale as per Department of Expenditure OM dated 21.04.2004, notionally w.e.f 01.01.1996- reg

Sir/Madam, I am directed to refer to the abovementioned subject. The matter has been examined by the Department in consultation with the Department of Expenditure. It has been decided with the approval of the competent authority to implement the Judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala dated 16.01.2024 in O.P (CAT) No 1/2023 in personam ie, in respect of the petitioners only.

2.

You are requested to take necessary action accordingly."

Let, learned counsel for the respondents take appropriate instructions. Re-list on 04.07.2025”

4.2

Further the matter was taken up for hearing on 04.07.2025 and following order was passed:-

“Learned counsel for the applicant states that pursuant to the direction of this Tribunal, relief has been granted to substantial people, i.e., 241 applicants out of 254. Learned counsel for the respondents is directed to take instructions qua the remaining 13 applicants, i.e., Mr. Akhilesh Chandra Diwaker, Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Mr. Ashok Kumar Shaw, Mr. Gostha Behari Ghosh, Mr. Murli Prasad Kharwar, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Bose, Mr. Ram Samujh Saroj, Mr. Sagar Kanti Sarkar, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Haldar, Mr. Sanjit Biswas, Mr. Srimanta Kumar Mandal, Mr. Tarkeshwar Dutta, and Mr. Uttam Kumar Mondal, as the denial of the benefits of notional pay fixation is only on the ground that the applicants are not the members of the Income Tax Gazetted Officers Association (ITGOA)”

4.3.

Now, the respondents counsel draws attention to an Office Memorandum dated 27.06.2025, which reads as under:-

“Sub: Implementation of judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai dated 08.12.2023 passed in WP No. 9649/2012 arising out of order of Hon'ble CAT Mumbai Bench passed in OA No. 86/2008 dated 17.01.2012.

Consequent upon the acceptance of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission (CPC) and the Implementation thereof, the Income Tax Inspectors and Income Tax Officers were initially placed in the pay scales of ₹5500-9000 and 6500-10500, respectively. Subsequently, as per the Office Memorandum dated 21st April 2004 issued by the Department of Expenditure (DoE) under F.No.6/37/98-IC, and the CBDT's letter dated 22.04.2004 issued under F.No. A11015/59/2002-Ad.VII, the pay scales of the posts of Income Tax Inspectors and Income Tax Officers under CBDT were revised to 6500-10500 and 7500-12000, respectively, w.e.f. 21.04.2004, l.e., the date of issue of the aforementioned OM of the DoE.

2.

Aggrieved by the OM of the Department of Expenditure (DoE) dated 21.04.2004, the Income Tax Gazetted Officers' Association filed an Original Application (OA) before the Hon'ble CAT, Mumbal Bench, vide OA No. 86 of 2008 dated 31.01.2008, praying that the OM dated 21.04.2004 Issued by the DoE may be modified so as to take effect from 01.01.1996 notionally for the purpose of pay fixation, and that the actual payment of arrears of salary be effected from the date of the said OM, I.e., 21.04.2004. The Hon'ble CAT, vide order dated 17.01.2012, allowed the OA, fixing the date of upgradation of pay scales as 01.01.1996 on a notional basis.

3.

The order of the Hon'ble CAT dated 17.01.2012 was contested by the Department by filing Writ Petition No. 9649 of 2012 before the Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai. The Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai, while considering the recommendations/report of the Anomaly Committee constituted by the CBDT in compliance with the directions of the Hon'ble High Court, Kolkata, in W.P. (C.T.) No. 21 of 2015 on an identical issue, proceeded in the matter. The recommendations of the said Committee were accepted by the Government of India, and a communication to this effect was issued vide letter dated 22.09.2023. Keeping in view these facts, the Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai, vide order dated 08.12.2023, has directed that:

"16.

In light of the abovementioned facts, the appropriate course of action is to dispose of this writ petition directing the petitioner to adopt the same course of action as has been done in respect of the original Applicants who had approached the Calcutta Bench of Tribunal that is acceptance of the report of Special Anomaly Committee and subsequent order giving effect thereto.

17... Accordingly the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 17.01.2012 in Original Application No. 86/2008 stands substituted/modified Petitioner will give the benefits as has been given to the Applicants before the Tribunal in Kolkata in Original Application No. 397/2009 in Writ Petition No. (CT) 21/2015."

4.

The matter related to the implementation of the order/direction of the Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai, dated 08.12.2023, passed in W.P. No. 9649 of 2012, referred to in the foregoing paragraph, has been examined by the CBDT in consultation with the Department of Expenditure. Based upon the opinion of the Department of Expenditure, vide I.D. Note No. 7/2/2008-IC dated 13.06.2025, and with the approval of the Competent Authority, the CBDT has decided to implement the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai, dated 08.12.2023, passed in W.P. No. 9649 of 2012, arising out of O.A. No. 86 of 2008, in respect of the 'applicants only', i.e., members of the Income Tax Gazetted Officers' Association as on the date of filing the O.A., i.e., 31.01.2008.

5.

In view of the above, the upgraded pay scales of ₹6500-10500 in the grade of Inspector of Income Tax, notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996, and 7500-12000 in the grade of Income Tax Officer, notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 or from the date of joining the post of Income Tax Officer, whichever is later, as per the 5th CPC, are granted to the 'applicants only', i.e., members of the Income Tax Gazetted Officers' Association as on the date of filing the O.A., I.e., 31.01.2008. The pay shall be re-fixed accordingly, and the actual payment as well as the arrears thereon shall be made w.e.f. 21.04.2004, i.e., the date of issuance of the Office Memorandum by the Department of Expenditure, F. No. 6/37/98-IC.

6.

All officers who were members of the Income Tax Gazetted Officers' Association (ITGOA) (Recognised Association) and working in any Unit of ITGOA as on the date of filing of the O.A., i.e., 31.01.2008, are mandatorily required to submit an undertaking stating that he/she was a bonafide member of ITGOA as on the date of filing of O.A. No. 86/2008, i.e., 31.01.2008. The undertaking should be duly certified by the General Secretary of the respective Unit of ITGOA. In the case of ITGOA members who have been transferred to another region, the home region (the Region where member was posted as on 31.01.2008) shall communicate the status of membership of transferred officers to the present region, based on the undertaking submitted by the concerned member duly certified by the concerned General Secretary of ITGOA Unit. In the case of retired members, based on the undertaking submitted by the concerned member, the General Secretary of the respective ITGOA Unit or the Secretary General (CHQ), ITGOA, shall issue a certificate of membership to the concerned PCCIT(CCA) from where the members are drawing pension.

8.

The concerned PCCIT (CCA) shall ensure the necessary verification of the certified undertaking submitted by the members of ITGOA before granting the upgraded pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 in the cadre of Inspector of Income Tax, notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996, and 7500-12000 in the cadre of Income Tax Officer, notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 or from the date of joining the post of Income Tax Officer, whichever is later.

9.

The concerned PCCIT (CCA)/HOD/DDOs shall ensure the correctness of the date of joining as Inspector of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer and other relevant particulars related to the re-fixation of salary of the concerned officers from their service books, on account of the notional upgradation of pay scales as mentioned above, to avoid any excess payment. This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority.”

5.

The aforesaid Office Memorandum explicitly makes it clear that the respondents have agreed to grant the benefit of notional pay fixation w.e.f. 01.01.1996, with actual monetary benefit from 21.04.2004, to the applicants herein. However, no formal order has been passed by the respondents with respect to the 13 applicants mentioned hereinabove, who are not members of the Association. It cannot be disputed that the applicants herein have approached this Tribunal and, therefore, the aforementioned benefits ought to be extended to them as well. On the basis of the factual matrix, it is evident that the applicants are similarly placed; hence, no distinction can be drawn between two sets of employees merely on the ground that some are not members of any association or union. It is wellsettled law that similarly situated persons cannot be discriminated against. It is incumbent upon the respondents to treat the applicants at par with those individuals who have already been extended the said benefit, regardless of their membership in ITGO or any other association. Denial of such benefits would not only be arbitrary but also discriminatory in nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in State of Karnataka vs. C. Lalitha [(2006) 2 SCC 747] and State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava [(2015) 1 SCC 347], has reiterated that in service jurisprudence, all persons similarly situated should be treated alike. Merely because one person has approached the Court cannot be a valid ground to deny the same relief to others similarly situated. Justice demands that no individual be allowed to derive undue advantage over others, and that benefits granted by the Court to a specific group must be extended to all identically situated employees. Failure to do so would amount to discrimination and be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

6.

In view of the above, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to comply with the order in letter and spirit in respect of all the applicants herein. The actual benefit of pay fixation/re-fixation, along with all consequential reliefs as mentioned above, in terms of the O.M. dated 27.06.2025, shall be granted to all the applicants within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is once again clarified that the relief(s) shall be extended to all 251 applicants herein. 7. The present O.A. is disposed of in the above terms. Pending M.As, if any, are also disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.”