1. education
2. grade school

Circulor
Office of the Principol Controller of Accounis (Fys)
I 0-A. S. K. Bose Rood, Kolkolo-7O1 0Ol
Dote, 03/O3/2O15
No. Poy/Tech-l/0116'h CPC)/201 5 /01
To
(i) A
(ii) A
(iii) A
up Controllers
(P) Nolondo
(P) Korwo
Subiect: Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndio common Judgemenl doted 09/12f14ln
respect of Dqlo Enlry Operotors in Ordnonce & Ordnonce equipment
Foctories.
ln the mqlter
of higher poy
Fqctories Orgonisotionr
scole in respect
o copy of Hon'ble
of Doto
Entry Operotors
Supreme Court
of lndio
of
Ordnqnce
common Judgement
doted 09/12/14, circuloted vide OFB No-3a0/OA-01 /09 /Y A/ 115 /HAPP /A/Nl, doted
14/O1 /15 is hereby uplooded in rhe PC of A web site for informotion ond guidqnce to oll
concerned.
Brqnch AOs under your control moy pleose be intimoted qccordingly.
_.4 _
Addl. Controller of Accounts (Fys)
Copy lo
..-/EDP Cell
MO Locol
for informoiion w.r.io obove, it is requested to uplood the leiter ond
the Hon'ble Supreme Couri verdict in the nel.
39---)
Sr. Accounti Officer (Fys)
'3'19
1
REPORTABLE
IN TI,IE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPEI,IATE L'URISDICTIO}T
C]V]L APPEAL NO. 10862 OE 2014
(arising out of SLP(C) rta 26911 of 2010)
SECRET Y, DEPARTMENI OF PERSONNE!,
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES & PENSION & ANR.
.,
APPELLANTS
VERSUS
crv]L APpEAL NOS. 10853 10864 OF 2014
(arisrng out of SLP(C) Nos.28595-95 of 2010)
UNION OF
INDIA E
ORS.
,,- APPEILANTS
],ERSUS
U6.D.
& ORS. ETC.ETC.
BHANGALE
C]VIL
-..
APPEAL NO. 10865 OF 2014
(arislng out of SLP(C) No.31613 of
UNION OF INDIA
RESPONDE}TTS
d ORS.
2011)
,.. APPiLLA.I{'TS
VERSUS
'N/. or*, n o*".
.,,
RESPONDEN]TS
WrLb
C]VIL APPEAL NO- 10856 OF 2014
(aiising oub of Sl,P(C) Nos,3306 of 2Al2)
I'NION OF INDIA & ORS.
APPEILANTS
]/ERSUS
SUNJAY GURVEKAR
RESPONDEIIT
CIVIL iipPFAl, No y)A6j OF 2Or4
Page
1
*
2
lrr r eilrE cul cf Sl,. 1c
UNION OE
INDIA &
)
N.s irr!6 .,r 2a1l)
,-- APPELLANTS
ORS.
VERSUS
SATYENDRA PRASAD
&
RESPONDENTS
ORS
\1
L.P
G.
UE
N]L
Delay condoneC Leave gr dnted
2-
I
The respondents who werc posLed in differenl- departmenLs rn
the Mjnr-sLrles of Unior, of India as Data EnLry Operator Grade 'A',
moved
applicaLlons before Ehe Central AdminisLrative Tribunals for
grant of pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 with effecE from 1"
1985 The Tribunal allowed Lhe applications
,January,
The judqment
orders passed by the Tribunal having affirmed by the High
and
CourL
are under cha]lenge in these appeals
The facls leading to Ehe cases are as follows:
A nrlnrber of posEs of ElBEtronic Data Processing were created
in the differenL departmenuo of MinisLries of the Government of
India
Persons were appolil(ed againsl such Electronic
processing posts wilh diff€fEnt
rromenclatures tiFewise Key Punch
OperaLo., Punch verifyinq Op6f,6tlor, Planning Assistant, Punch
verifier,
Data
Technjcal Assi6Egllg, Punch cum verifier
cum
(Itollerith)
Page
2
,
r,..
s
3
L'l a ,rllr.il
ir r:rr
!--i, airr.:rr::si.'il] Lr.de r rLrg.].s.ron rn paragr.aph
rr
I thiL
E):anirre ti1.: iiit er
..t
:lepaft merL .ri
:.rr..rr.rrc3
.rir.i ]].!r!gcst rcoigan L::;ir.l]
of
sh.jut,l
exrearng
ElecLronr. Data Pro.essirg posLs and prescribe uuiform pay scales
anC des-gnations in consultation wiEh Lhe DeparLmen! of personnel
& TrainrrLg In pursuance of aLove suqgesLion, a CornrniLtee had beer
set up b], Lhe DeparLment of Ulectronics rn November, 1985 AfLer
car.eful c.rrsiCeral,ion o! Lhe re coromenda t r ons nade by tshe said
C.n:..Lir1.c.r, G.,!r.ir.xteir: o:
:1 .!,.t:.je
i.r
iLidia
hdc . deci.reC Lo inrroduce
l.tr..rLr.-Lrr. t.rta Pro.rcc!:il:j p.r.rL!r j_r', l,irnisrrj-,;
pay
O
iq_
F 7 i1) /IC185 (41) da!,ed 11: Seprember, 1989/ retcyarLE por.ron o:
whrch reads as fol lo{s :
No
't{o F.7
( 1)
/ rC/8t; ( 44 )
Goverrment cf r.dia
Minist ry af Finance
,epar:amert af Experdlture
Iflp.l en,enta tjon Cet t
New
Delhi, .lared tidi sepr,
89
QFFICE UEMQEAIDIY
subj Fationaljsaajor? of pay scales of Efectranic
Processrng posts:
Dat a
Ihe
unde.signed is di.ecred ro refer ta the
Fourth Centi'a l pay Commissrdn conrarned
i. paragraltr il 45 of LLp Reparx qherein ir y,,as suggesred
tna. the depa.tmert of ,.lect.onic should examire ard
suggest r,4organisatro. of exjsrjng
Elecaronjc DaLa
P.ocessing pcsas ard plescribe urifarn pay scates and
desiqnaL-rons rn consultaaio. with the Departnent af
Persarnel- In pu-.suance al abaye suggestian, a. Commjaree
irad been sEl up by Departnent ot ETectranics j, Novenber,
798t; AIter .a.eful conside.ratlan at the .ecommendacions
nade fy .his C.maittee, Government of lndia has decided ta
irtroduc-- fo-llck,ing pay sa.ucEure fcr Electraiic Data
re.o.nmendations .f
Processinq po-sts l
Page
3
l-)
]j.']
Tlrrs
wr
ll
be Enil
;,
Ir.'r
!!tr,M
. :;
E rr1
ll
.-rt i:,.ire
Fremo.lo,al crade
Err.y for
l,dtders oi legr ee
1n EigateerLtg af
t.sr gradual icn er.rn
s.r P..e/Ma!ns
.. losL oraduaai'n
By
i
Assis!rn. Grad.'E'
I
P,.mD.io.a.1 ctarre
u,der rl'jeir admrnrscrac
Process;r9 posts
scales arrd recr'ui'ment
.1acl ana r i...
necessaiy as per pay sl'rrrcEu
Minisa rY/DePaLLnen
E
'
Page
4
!r.rL,- atr rir-- gra.ies jr
lti)
d.p.nd
tt
pro!..res l. .r.er.: arrl t' , 1. ql1tcL) r: .ca existriE at
adv;sors
!.es-piE it /rl t be .rore rr 1r nI)I)lo/a, of i rrancial
a.i sublect to !rocedurEs l.ir,l doon fo. tire purpose
|r.j ji a,!lr iror ae dFl
:i
Ir.r st-'r:!'!--i)irrr:rr.,,
indicated aga)nsL each grade
Tne qua llfi.a. io.s , r
and
i l tustratjre
anlY
abave
para 7
at
rerTeq
carry
ouL
the
,r
/
I
DEparL rents/Mirr;str-ies
existing EDP posEs ]n ac.or,iance ,itn rec.urtmerL .rules as
alr.ady preEcritied })/ r:ne' r 'Io ersure uriformitv i" regard
La RecfuiXnent RLrles for a]re EDF posts, Depaftnent af
Persoirel & 1'rarr-ing iri i)fing reguested to devise model
adopted by
"
itirlstry/DePr.t.nt
5
PersonEci, Pub]l,tr GFicvances ' ?ensic,ns, GovernmenL of Indla bY
1990
I I 'r, February,
O 14. r\o AB a4atl/t5/A9 Estl, (RR) dated
forwarded a copy ol Ehe llodel RecruitmenE Rules for various
caLegories of posLs in the ElecLronic DaLa Processing Discipline
The Model RecruitmenL Rules are based on
the suggestions conLained
in Lhe DeparLment ol ExpendiLure's o M No-F ?(1)/ICl86(44) dated
11tL September, 1989
ln the said
Model
RecruiLment RuIes the
followlng grades of Data Entry Operators with scale6 of PaY and
gualif ications uere sholtn:
'th1s di)1 be ett,Y
far
Higher
Grade
qith
Secandary
DaLa
af
ktaq)edse
This vi17 be enLry
9.ade ,ot g.aduaEe
wi rrr
knawledge af
Data E ttY ua.k af
pronaLjanai Gtade far
Data Entry Operataf
tailjhg
crade
ehich by transfer an
dnd
deputaLian,
Page
5
a
pr.n.ii.nal
Cta
Enl rl:
Jron
aP?ratar At.,le
Lnr.a ty
Iatliit:i
a
Degree
af
rccogtize.t LIniwersitY
wi rI
or equivaie,E
scieoce, Matl1enati.s,
comme..e,
E.ononi.s,
proviso Lo Arlicle
309 of qhe Co stiLuLion cf India issued a Rule.
from Department of Revenue, GovernmenE of India regulating the
method of recruitmenL to Group 'c' lTechnical) posts in the
[fectronic Data Processing Discipfine of Lhe field
formations of
the Central Board of Excise and Customs, DeparEment of Revenue'
Ministry of Finance, commonly known as the Electronic Data
Processing, Disclpline
(Group 'C
Technical Posls) Recruitment
Rules, 1992 notified bn 3'd April, 1992- Therein Ehe scales of pay,
quafifications cf appointmenL, source of fecruiLment, etc were
shown
as fol1o\rs:
EB.5A
This iil1 be entrY
.r
Hiqher
i.tb
secandz
k.awledge ot Data
Direct RecruiEhenc
This wi.71 be enLrY
qrade fo. Erradua.e
;i Et, kta Tedqe o!
Da.a Entty wotk at
pranatianal Grade tar
Data E Lry APeraLor
railing
crade
Page
5
I
kal.l]]-:,.1.;ns-fe..r
J--l r: r.1,r,
1.t..;1ta).
trcn
oper:toi
fa i ting
bf 711e..
crade
E-try
wnr.l)
by
a,J.ric.io.ai
crade
llom
,.irv
op.ra.Dr
G'rade
fdi lr.s
wnicn
b!
., '..i
7.
r..rIi
rmP.i
In t]:e Depar.tment ot Personndf and Training, Ministry of
Personrlel, !,ub1ic ariewances and Pensions, a Rr,le under provlso to
A.rl,1c1e 109 of the ConstiLuLion v,as already exrsLinq for
MlnisLerial
Group 'C'
PosEs, namefy, lhe
Commrssron (Non MlnlsLeriel,
(HolleriLh)
-4ssistanL
Group 'C'
Non
Staff
SelecLion
pos!s of
Technical
anC Puncher-cumverifier
(HolleriEh)
RecruiLnenL Rules r9'78. The aforesaid Rriles, 1978 was supersecled
oy
L-6
r
ol
r. .onn ss'or .F.L-ctro_r( Ddta D)o'ossl.ng
croup 'c' Posts of Data Entry Discipline) Recruilment Ru1es,
it
was notlfied
1996.
cn 10i5 OcEober, 1996 In the said Rules again
sirnilar scales oi pay, qualrfrcaLions, method of recruitmenl-, etc
were shourr which are as follous:
'lhls nrL) be enaty
far
Higher
arade
secandat:t/ wi th
Data
,kidkledge of
Dr.ccr ne..ui tment
This sill be entry
gr:de for graduaae
wi.h krawledse
..td Ent,r vark af
Page
7
"}i
yei.s regrular se.vi.e
failinq
\4hi.h
by
.ia.sfer
de4ltaa r.n,
and
pEr.r,-.aaqe,!y di.e..
I
8.
From the Ofiice Memorandum and Rrr]es, as noLiced above, the
folloL,ing facts
emerge
:
(i) In view af tbe r;cannendac lons af Faurth
Central Pay Commr.ssjo, (paragraph j1 q5 of the
Repart), the Governnent af India constjtr]tei a
Connittee to suggesL the reorganisatian of
existjnEr deparEment at Electranic DaLa pracessing
posts sucir as Data Entry Aperatar which were in
lhe scale of pay of Rs-95A-1750.
(ii) By Office Memorandum dated j7.h September,
1989, pursuant to the afoLesaid .suggestions Ehe
Governmerrt af India delrided ro jntrqduce pay
sErucEure far Electronic Data pracesEjng pasts
with Eeparate fiome]rclatures that isr (i)Data
Entry Operator Grade ,A,
Rs-7150-150A wjth
entry crade far. Hlgher Secandary wath knawledge
af Data Entry wark; (ii) Data Entry Operatar
Grade 'B' - 1s pLamotranal past of Data Entry
Page I
aperat.! crace , ', ) tr);l;rl),, Data Entt._ oper.aror
Gia.Je 'a'' rs pr(,r r i{]n posr af Data Entry
Operator Gra.le 'B' ,i/,.r ,aEa Entry ApeLatar Grade
'D' 1s pronotio, /)usi: of Data Entry OperaLar
Grade 'C' ard D.rtn l:tt)tt:y Operacor Grade '8, is
pronoEiaral past ol Data Entry operaLor Grade
'D'
.
For such
9.
promot ion,
l-he person 1s noL only
requ i red
The hlgherr post of DaEa Enrry OperaEor Grade 'B,rin the scale
oI pay of Rs_1150 2200 and higher posLs of DaLa Entry Operator
crade 'C' aDd DaEa EnLry operaLor Grade .Il, can be filled up by
promotion on the recommendation of Staff SelecLion CommiEtee.
The
person having qualilicaLion and experience cannot cfaim promotion
Lo the higher posE, his turn of piomotion comes when d
wacancy
arises or in case Lhere is'a cause of action
10.
Case6 before Certsral Adhini6tratiwe
AfLer rationalisaLion
Trihnna'l
of pay scales of
Efectronic Data
Processing posts as Daba Entry Operator, numlcer of persons,
who
were working against lower posEs of Key punch OperaLor in Lhe
scale of pay of Rs 950-1500 and redesignal_ed as Data Entry
Operator Grade 'A', claimed that they are entiEted for the scale
of pay of Rs.1350 2200. CenLral AdministraLive Tribunal
Benches
situated in different SLates, passed contradictory orders- In
many
of Lhe cases refjefs were gr.anted by aflo,ring the scale of pay of
Paqe
9
ll)
Rs Il50 2200 Lo Ehose who ari, .Ijr.rlgnaLed as IlaEa
EnLr.y gp.rintol
Grade 'A, whereas some clairnN ,rere retecEed as well Some
ot (bE
examples are as fotlous
(i) Ce tral Adm.r]rr.qtrac jve Tribunat, Cuttack
Ben.:h, Crissa rn OA Na.249/1997 had granted the
pay s.ale of Rs 1)\a 2200 ta Data Entry Operator
Grade ,A,. The S_Lp filed against the ,same !/as
djsmr:ssed sutnnarily an 15th May, t99t
Cenri-al Admrrrrsrrarr.ve Tribunaf, Ahmedalad
Benc-h, cujarat in y_A.yishnu prasad & Ars- v
U.O-I & Ors by judgnent ddted 1sr Septenber,
1999 dlso g,rarted prayer direcLing
the
auEiozitie to pay r]]e apptjcant.s scate af pay of
lir/
Rs-135A-22A0
fiii)
Centraf Admjnistratiye TrjbunaT.
Bench in aA Na.957,/199A by judgneni
December, 1992 alfowed the benefits in
l.he employees-Da ta Entry OperaCors.
Hyderabad
(|v) t6""ri"",
refief was grante,J by the Central
AdminisEratjye Tribanaf , Lucknow Eench.
lv) oA which wai preferred befare the principaf
Bench of Centra l qdr,.nrsr?d(iv- T ia)1al
I,J- ))
Delhi was, hawever, dismi ssed.
(vi) l4any af the petitians agajrst the aforesaid
JudEmencs 4/ which unran ot indta maved before
C,he .sl.preme Court nere djsmj.ssed r]r fimine.
(vii)'I'he
tral
Adninistrative
Tribunal
!trra-ipLrr
M.H. Bag & O.rs _ ys.
UOI & Ars (AA No 142 af 95) affo$/ed siliifar
benefi ts referring E,he decrsiors af different
Ce
Page
10
11
Benchs af CenEra
di ffeleJr t States
I
/r,fl lrrscraafve
L'r1rl1tna
at
I
11. The appellanLs -Union o{ Tndia, SecreEary, DepartmenL of
Personnel & Training, Minist.ray of public crievances and pensions
and another. brought to Lhe Irtice of Lhis Court the following
judgments and order passcd by Lhe different Benches Central
Admiri
sr
lr)
raLive Tribr.al,
JudgniFr( .ia.ed 28.09 )t99 passed by
r:.) o A,t,r i42/1995;
CAT ,rabaTpur Bench
(ii.) Judgm--nL dated oJ.7a.2ao1 passed -by
i! O A tJ{) 150/2AA7i
CA,r r,Dcknaw Bench
Ii1;),Iudgment dat:ed 27 0.1.J00.1 passed by C:Ar Mumbai
in o-a No 737/2AA2,
(lv) Jadgment dated 79 72,.2AA6 passed by cAT Madras
in A.A No-3s2 ta i54/2A05
12- The Cenlral AdmilistraLive Tribunal,
I\4adras Bench
Bencr)
Bench
by
judgmenL
dated 7.h Novembe-r, 2008, howewer, dismissed the O.A.No.87O of
200?. The said order was chal.Ienged before the High Court.
The
Hrgh Court of ,Judicature at Madras by judgment dated 14!h October,
2009, referring
to Ehe different
crders passed by t.]re various
Central Administrative Tribunal Benches alfowed the wr.it peLiEion
filed by the respondenE-T V.L N Mallrkarjuna
Rao-
13. In vielv of the decrsions passed by Ehe differenL Benches of
Centrai Admjnislr.llive Tribunal , some confusion appears to
have
Laken place in i:he DeparLmenL of Centraf covernment. Bv its
Circular No
CGDA No.EDP
/t13/IllPC)
/vol-14 dated 4th ,fanuary,
Page
11
l2
2006, Lhe ollice oi ConLr ,,l l , r G^ner.ll of Ilefence Accounls
fixed
inLimaLed that the pay ol the l)Iios Grade A & B has to be
and
from 1.1 86 or from Lhe date ol appointment lihichever is laEer
afrears are [o be
drawn
Lhat: such decisrcn has
proviso to ArLicle
309
accoralirigly. The said letLer does not show
been ral"en by the Unlon of lndia or under
of Lhe ConsLitution of lndia
reEpg!dea!Ele:pp!1s!4!5 l).eEa!e
14. case qt
a@i n i qtral-iwe Tribunal-r
ihe
central
Respondent T v L N Mallikarjuna Rao, pr"llrsuanE to Key Punch
operators examinaLion 19g9, was appointed on 11'i' septenber' 1989
as Kcy Punch oper.ator He was r:edesignated as DaEa EnEry OperaLor
c.ade 'A' w e f. 16'r Novemirer, 1992 He submr'tLed a represenLaLion
on 11" l,larch. 199'r for. seeking placemenL in Lhe Data EnEry
and
OperaLor Grade 'B' on the basrs cf his educaEion qualificaLron
the
same was
relecLed by Ietter dated 25rb JuIy' 1994 on Lhe ground
thair the posL ol DaLa ErLry OperaEor Grade 'B' in SLaff selection
Grade 'A'Comrnissron is a promoLionaf post of Data E:rlrrY Operator
one coul'i
l,,]ereIy, on accoun! of hrgher educatlonal qualificaLion
not c lairi higher Post.
a99q '
15. Agalnst the order of relection dared 25t! JulY,
'r v-1,.N- Mallikarjuna Rao moved before Lhe Central
respondent
in the
AdmrnistraLive 'l'rrbuial - The conLenLion of the respondent
_
Grade
said case ldas lhat he should be givelr Data EntrY OPerator
was Gracluale on the
'B' r.ighL fr.rm his inlEial appoirlEnenL as he
dated 11'f
daLe of applying for the Dcsi and Lhat in view of O.M
Page
72
13
September, 1989 Dar-a Entry
tor
graduates
OJ),
The
r{tiir cradF B would be enLry grade
registered
before
CenLraf
AdminisLratlve Tribunal, MadraH ll.rnch as O.A. No.87O of 2007 which
was dismissed on meriL by Ehe Cenrral AdministraLive Tribunal on
7rL November, 2008. Against t-h.| said judgment of the Central
Administrative
Tribunal,
frled Writ PeLition
NO-
reslJondent .1'. v. L.
N. Mallikarjuna
Rao
3195 of 2009 before tshe High Court of
.Iudicature aE Madras. The Dlvision Bench of the High Court by
Ehe
impugned judgmenE dated 14.t ocLober, 2009 set aside the judgment
of the CenEral AdminisErative Tribunal and allowed the writ
peLrtion darecLinq lhe appellanLs to g.anE benefit of pay scale of
Rs.1350-2200 w.e.f .
Lhe date of iniE.ial
respondent afong with all
appoinl,ment of the
consequential benefits in vrew of
Lhe
decisions of Ehe differenE Benches of the Central AdministraLive
Trlbuna
I
16. Respondents S.D. Bhangale, S.H. Patil and R.P. Joshi
were
appointed as Punch and Verifier Operators in the Ordnance Factory,
under the MinisLry of Defence, Government of Indta. One of
them
as appointed on 2oth Septen$er, 1988 as Punch and Verifier
OperaLor' 1n the pay scale of Rs 950-1500. After reor.ganizaLion of
ElecEronic
DaEa Processlng Posts,
Lhe
respondenLs
redesignated as Data Entr.y OperaLoIS Grade 'A'. On 10.h June, 1999,
the respondents were promoEed tc the post of Data EnLr.y Operators
Grade 'B' in the oa1, s.ale of Rs 4500 7000 u.e-f.
AfEer. abouL Lwo years of
10:r June,
1999
their: promotion, respondents S.d.
?age
13
14
Bhangale and others made repres(ltr.rt ion Lo gran! Ehem pay scale of
Rs.1350-2200 from their
iniEi t daLe of appointmenE. However,
having not been qranl,ed suclr retief,
the respondents fited
O-A.Nos.231 and 240 of 2003 before the Cenl,raf AdminisEraE.ive
Trlbunal,
\r1th praycr to exEend benefits of pay scale
ot Rs.1l50 2200 from the dal:e of their iniLial appointment as
Bombay Bench
Punch and Verifier
Operators.
On contest,
the
Central
AdminisLraEive l.ribuna1, Bomt,ay Bench by its detailed common
judgmenL and order dared 2j.d Jutt/, 2004 dismissed the original
applrcations filed
by the respondents_S D Bhangate and others
However, the said order has been seL aside by the Division Bench
of the High Courl, of Judicarure aE. Bombay by rhe impugned judgmenr_
dated 28* August, 2At9 by referring Eo different decisions
rendered
Tribunal,
bv
different
Benches of
Ehe Central Administrative
afflrmed by the judgmenL passed by the Hiqh
CourE.
17. Respondents - V Ambi, Thi runavukkara su, A. Selvaraj and R.
Ravi, were appointed in Heavy Alfoy penetrator project (HApp)
under Ehe MinrsLry of Defence, covernmenL of India as planning
Asslstant on casuaf basis u e f- 16rh Novernber, 1989, 25ri AugusL,
1989 and 20th September., 1989 in the then pay scale of Rs.950 1500,
later orl Lhelr services wele regularized_ At Ehe time of Eheir
appoinEmenL rn HAPP, it was a Joint Venture projecE of Defence
Research and Del'elopment Organlzation and in 1990 HApp was
transferred Lo Ordnance Factory Board and their services were
regufarrsed. On 8,r, November, 1995, the Ministry of Defence re_
Page
14
15
designaied the Plannrng Assistn rr Lo Lra[a Entr]- Operaror crade ,A,
uith hlgher pay scale of Rs ll'0
moved
150! The aforesaid respondenLs
beforc the CenLraf Admrnr.r(raLive Tribuna], Madras Bench
O.A-No.432 of 1997 seeking pdy s.:ale of Rs.1500 2660 \i.e.f
1n
11rn
September, 1989. The Centsraf Adminrst]:ative Tribunal, Madras Bench
dismissed Ehe said original aFplicalion by order dated 22"" July,
1999 The respondenEs lornlly filed O.A.No.?01 of 2009. By
judqmenh daLed l,.i September, 201C, Centraf AdminisEratiwe Tribuna.L
in OA No-701 of 2009 passed certain directions
following the
judgment of the High Court of Bombay in a simifar matter-
The
dppellanEs wer.e .lirected to grant pay scale of Rs. 1350 2200
Lo
Lhe respondents. Berng aggraeved, the appellants f1led a w-rit
peLiLion being W.P. No.6342 of 2011 befor.e the High Court of
.Iudicature at Ma.lras. By Ehe impugned judgmenl: datred 17i
March,
2011 Ehe Division tsench of Lhe High CourE of ,.IudicatrJre at lJadras
dismissed the '.rrr L peLltion.
18. Respondent Sunjay curvekar was appointed on 11th Llanuary,
1990 as Puncher cum-Verifier in the office
of Staff Selection
Commissiorl, Department of Personnel and Training,
Ministry of
Public Grievance and Pensions in the pay scale of R.950 1500
He
was redesignaLed as Data EnLry Operators Grade 'A' . He also moved
before Lhe Centr.ll Admrnlsl,ratrve Tribunal, Bangalore Bench for
similar re11ef. The CenLral AdminisLralive Trlbunal by the order
challenqe made by r-he appeLlant Unlon of India, Djvjsion Bench of
Paqe
15
16
Hiqh court of Karnataka, by ll)r. jmpugned -iu.tqmert dar-e.l
SepEember, 2010 dismissed the wr1! peLltjon
22"4
19. Slmilar is the case of Ehe respondents SaEyendra prasad and
ot.hers, who were rnittdlly
appolnted againsL ce:rtaj_n technical
posts ana rrere LaLer redesiqlr,ed as Data Entry OperaLors crade
'A'. Thev souqhL for similar relief by filrng O.A_No 1104 of 2002
before the CenLraI Admrnistrative Tribunal, patna Bench The
CenLraf A.iminisLraEive Tribunat, paLna Bench by order. dated 291"
May, 2009 djrecteC the appeltanEs to pay Ehe respondenEs scale of
Data Enl,ry Operaror Grade 'A, vr e.f_ 1_1.1996 white mentioning
Lhat arrears will be resLricled to one year before the ftllng of
O.A. The sard order !/as chatlenged by Lhe appettant._Union ot India
befor.e the Patna High Court. A Division Bench of the paEna Hlgh
Court, by the impuqned judgment dated 22nd Februar:y, 2at2
dismissed the writ peEitlon being C.W J.C No. 1.723A of 2OO9
20
, LearneC
coLrnse
!
appearing on behalf
of
the appettants
submiLEed Ehat the posE. cl DaEa Entry OperaLor Grade .B, wrLh pay
scale oI Rs 1350-2200 is hrqher posL and the respondents have no
right to claim th(i higher pay scafe merefy on the ground Ehat they
ar.e GraduaLes and Lhat
they were performing sirnitar dutaes.
21. On the other hanC, accordirlg to Lhe respon.lents, in vier./ of
different decisions rendered by the Central Adminlstrative
pay scale of Rs 1:-50-2200 from the due dat.e
Paqe
16
71
22. Itr was furLher conLended on i)ehalf of Ehe respondents Lhat
Lhe appellants having already iorplemented Lhe orders of the
warious Benches ot Ehe central Adrninistratiwe Tribunal as affirmed
have
by Lhe High court, Ehey cannoE discriminaEe between tshose who
already been granted the benefits and Ehe respondents herein'
Reliance \,ras placed on one anoi:lier judgment passed by the Central
a.lminrstrative Tr.ibunal as affirmed by the High Court23, We have consldered the rivaf conLentlons raised by the
the material
I earned counsel for the parties and gone thror.rgh
placed on record.
24. Ptior Lo 1986 Ehere wer.e in existence two grades of operaEors
viz. Junror Key Punch riperators in the scafe of Rs 25o-400 and
pay
Senior Key Punch operaLors in the scale of Rs l50-550 The
scales of all the:ie posts as revised to Rs 950_1500 and Rs-1200
made
2040 respectively w.e f. :l:179a6 pursr'rant to recommendation
by Lhe Fourth Pay Cornmission. These posLs came to be re designated
B
as DaLa Entr.y Operator, Grade-A and Data Entry Operator' Grade
in the scale oi Rs.1150-1500 and Rs 135O 2200 respecLively
pursuanE to Ehe office Memorandum dated 11 9 1989 L'hereby
ElecEronic Data prccesslng PosLs have been reorganized'
Ehe
consider drfferenL pay scale on the
was
recommendations ol the Four.Lh pay Commission, a CommitLee
constiLuLed Lo suggest reor:ganizaLion ot the exr-sting Electronic
25. With a view
Lo
ir. rlr
i'_-ar.'ra rtl..
the Government of
Page 1,
1B
Indra vide Offrce
Memorandrm
'l,ted 1l 9 1989 m.rdc the followinq
resLructure for. ElecEronic DaLa Irrocessing
S.No.
De6ignaEioD of Pay Scale
Ehe post
Datsa
EEt.ry Ope!ator
Ent.ry 1150-1500
Grade -A
2
Data
Opc
ra t
EnE
or
ry 7154
22DA
of
oualificarion/Source
En
Data
I
PosEs:
Ery
Thls i11 be enLry grade
for hiqher secondary wi lh
knowledge af Data Entry
This will be enl,ry grade
graduates
for
lrith
knodledge of Data EnLry
work
Promotional grade
for DaLa Entry Operator
Grade-A
S,rbsequenLly, Rules under proviso Lo Arl,icle
Constltution
memorandum
oi
Indi a has been framed
309 of the
From Lhe aforesald
and Rules iL is clear that. qualificaLion for Data Entry
Operator Grade-A is higher secondary whereas the qualifical,ion for
Data Ently Operator Grade B is graduaLion and it
is a pro otlonal
posL from Data EnLry OperaLor Grade A persons who have six )ears
of experience.
25. The classiflcation
of
posLs
and determinaEion of
pay
strucLure comes wrthin the exclusrve domain of the Executive
and
Lhe Tr.ibunal cannol siL in appeal over the wisdom of Ehe ExecuLive
in prescribln_q ,rerLain pay slructure and grade in a parl,icular
.eIv:--. Thnr- -ldy bo nole g.ddes than one in a parEicular
27. Tbte covernment on consideraLion of Lhe report submiLEed by
Lhe Connrittee, issued
OIfice
Memorandum dated
11 91989
Page
18
19
grades oi
prescr:r-bing therein CiffererrL l)iv' scales and dilferent
of recruitment Eo
Data Entry OperaLors besides Lhe nrode and mamer
for each enLry grade posE 3s well as
and qualifications
court or
and experience for promotional grades The
etigibility
its power of
Ehe Tribunal, in our opinion' would be exceeding
of the
judicial review af iL siEs ili appeal over the decision
ExeCuLiveintherlatterotpresCribingthepaystructureunLessib
14 and 15 of the
is sholrn l-o be in vrolaLion of Articles
ConsLitutiorl of IrLdia
qualifications'
Dilference in pay scates based on educational
accountability' qual i iication'
nature oi joh, responsibiliLj"
violaLe ArLicle 14
experience and manner: of recr'uitment does not
of the Consa-ituticn of lndia
8 1 1999 was
28. Before the CAT, Bombay Bench a chart dated
uere listed which were
produceC wherein cer:tain addiEional duties
and above Lhe
be performed by Data EnEry Operators Grade B over
Lo
Grade-A were
duties assigned/pr:escribed for Data Entry operators
prescribed
lisEed Considering Lhe edr'rcational qualifications
and Ehe rufes for
under Lhe office Memorandum daEed 11 9 1989
Grade B and the
appointmenr to l-he posts of DaLa EnL:ry operators'
classificaLion of
order assigning drjtles, !'e are of the view EhaL
does not violaLe any
Data EnLry Operators rn differenL grades'
14 and 15 of the
righL of equality g'iaranLeed by ArLicles
protection
aonsliLuLlon nor does rL violate Ehe consLiLutionaf
theretortj'
agalnst hostlle or arbiLrary dlscrrflrlnatlorl-
Paqe
19
2t
urithoul- discus:ring
the
uatture
of
job,
responsibillty,
accountability and srraEus and rank of the one or other posLs of
differents Data Encry OperaLors i e. crade-A or Grade B held tshaE
they were per.forming similar duties and are hence enLiEled for
equal pay and elrgible for Rs.1350-2200 on the principte of equal
pay for equal work. BoLh Lhe Tribunal and the High Court also
failed Lo notice that the Daca Entry Operator Grade B in the pay
scale of Rs.1350 2200 is a promo!ronal grade and only Ehose who
have six years of experience are eligible
for such promotion.
The
promotiona] grade and entry grade cannot hawe Ehe same pay scale
ard in absence of declaration ihat raLionatizaLion of pay scate of
Electronic Data Processing posts made by Office
1a-9 a919 rs illegal,
Memoran.ir.rm daEed
no such benefit could have been granted.
29. BoEh the Tribunal and Ehe High Court also faited Eo notice
Lhe sEatutory r:u1es fr.amed under proviso to Article 309 of the
Constltution of lndia issued by the order of the president of
India vide notif:rcation daEed 3.d Apri1, 1992 and norificarion
daLed 10 10.1996 from Department of
personnel and Training,
I{inisLry of Personnel, P.c. and pensions.
BcEh Lhe Tribunal and the High Court also erred rn rgnorlng
the ]aw laid dovin by thls Court in plethora of
jLrdgmenLs LhaE Ehe
"princlple of equ.lf pay for equal work// is not atways applicabfe
even if duties and luncLions are of simllar nature.
Page
27
20
ex.eptiL-jn .ran be taKeIi Lo Lhe dilference in lhe pay str'uctlrres of
enLry grade of DaLa EnLry opela[ors and the next higher grades
ln nrost of r-he im!,ugied orders had fallcd Lc noLice
the background o1 raLiooalizaLion of pay scafes of Electronic Data
Processinq PcsLs 1r, these cases, both the Tribunals and Lhe High
CAT Benches
cou.L iailed Lo notrce thal l'efore ra!ionaLizaLion of Lhe posLs,
i.e. prior. to 1986 Lhere were in existence Lwo grade of operators,
Junror (ey Punch Operators in rhe scale of Rs.250-400 and Senior'
Key Punch Ope.at.|s 1n the scale of Rs 350-550 The pay scales of
Lhese posts were
revised to 950 1500 and Rs 1200 2040 respecl-1vely
In vie,/i of r.eorganizaLion of ElecEronic Data
Processing posts the Key Punch OperaLors and other posts which had
lower paY scale of F-s 260 400 was rer.rised Eo Rs.950 1500 ']'he j r
posts were re-Cesignated as DaLa EnErv Operators Grade-A with
w.
f
1.1 1986
benefit of othe. revision of Lhe scale of Rs 1150 1500 In facL
dcubfe benefit lvas g.anEed tcr Lhem w e f 1.1.1985 i e one
revisicn i:l the scaie of Rs 950_1500 as they were entitled as per
recomm,ondaLion of Pay Revision ConnitLee an.l the oLher levision
w.e.f
same
datE i e. 1.1 1986 in Lhe scaLe of Rs 1150-1500 on the
recoinmendaEion o:
Lhe Committee set up by the DepartmenL of
ElecLronics L,hi:h ,tas accept.ed by Lhc Government of India vide
Office Memorandun dated l1 9 - 1989. 1E is only Ehose senlor Key
Punch Operator:s Lrho were
in the higher scale of Rs 350 560 having
qr.)aiilrca[1or oi' qra.]uate and Hhose scale was revised Lo r?00
v,
ef
1.1 1985 ]rrespecLive of Lhat dttLeLeiL ileiLeiieb "
t
2040
l\l
'L'- '
Paqe 20
22
7^ Mewa Raj] Kanoj ia
scieaces a,]d otbe.s,
(79A9 )
A77 India
InE
titute
of
MedicaT
2 SCc 235 Lhis Court has inter alia
held as fol lcws:
"5. While considerlng the question of applicatjon of
principle of ''Equal pay for equaf work,, it has to be borne
1n nind that it is open to the State to c]assify enpfoyees
on the basis af qualifacations, (Jutj.es and
responsibifil.ies of thd posts concerned. If the
c.Iassificataon has reasonabfe nexus tlith the objectave
sought to be achieved, efficjency in the admjnistratian,
the State would be justjfied in prescrjbing different pay
scafe but if the classification does not stand the test of
reasonabfe nexus and the cfassifi-cation is founded on
unreal/ and unreasonable basjs jf would be vlofative of
Articfes 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Equafity nust be
anong the equafs, Unequaf cannot cfaim equafjty.
7. Even assunitig that the petitfoner perforns sinjLar
duties and futictions as those perforned by an Audiofogist,
rf 1s not suffacient to uphofcl his cfaan for equal pay, As
afready observed, an judging the equality of t/ork for the
purpases of equaf pay, regard nLtst be had not onfy ta the
drlt1es and functions but also to the educatianal
quafificatiot)s, qualitatfve difference and the neasures of
respot)sibiflty prescrjbed for the respective posts. Even
if the dLtties and functiotts are of simifar nature but if
the educatianaf quafificatjons prescrJbed for the two
postS are dlfferent atld tttere is djfference in neasure of
respousibjfittes, the principfe of ,/Equal pay for equal
tr'ork// t!oufd not appfy
30
It fias iurther re affirmed in a three .Iudge Bench judgment of
this Cour.t Ln Shyan Babu Verma & Others v. (Jnian af India t
Others, (7994) 2
SCC 527
wherern Lhe Courtr hefd:
9...
The nature of work nay be are or less the sane
but scaje of pay nay vary based on aca(Jenic quafification
eyperrer).F Which ilrsfifres l-Tacsifiaafion Thc
prjnclple of 'equal pay tor equaL work, should not be
applied jn a fiechaniaal or casual ffianner. Classafication
ntade by a body of experLs after fuff stucly ancl analysjs of
t
age
22
23
the work should not be dlstu
t/hich lndicate the classl ii'a
has
-e;rir;in State
'rl'it"been exartined
iLrl'.
o
anv dlrection
s ha\,e lo es
reasonabfe basis to treat t
Lhe clai
is
issued bv the court'
anl
ArtTcle 14 of the Canstitution'"
31.
shvan
111
Babu
vei:na was simifar Lc
Lhe
Pharmacists
In Ehe saad case the Thrrd Pay commission placed
tu'o scale
Gra.i'r - B inLo two caLeqories and prescrlbing
of pai,
ll ) r"ar :uily
presenL
qualiilcalion
qualifieC plrarmacisL who possess Lhe
menLioned under the Act al]d (i1) For unquallfied
r-he AcL
PharnacisLs, those covered by cLause (d) of secLicn 31 of
Lhe
The sald r:ecommendaLlon ''as given elfect from 1 1 1973 In
iL r'Jas .rrqed on behalf of Lhe peEitioners EhaL based
for equal
eoual paY
of
princrple
pay scaLe ol Rs.330 550 which v'as
In the sald case after
of pay [o the oEher lhaimacists
naki.-q 1,he abovE said observation Lhis Court furLher helduere entiLled !o
Lhe
"70, In tlte facLs of presert case there is Do scope far
reference to the quaTifications
1n the tlecislon of the
respondents to lnplement tlr'o scales of pay for two
of Pharmacists Grade B. It does nat vioLate
calegortes
"rf
tt.r /rroI'l sions of thP Co/lstl flrfion calTinq for
7,t1
interference bY this CoLlr t
Pharnacists t/ith
.
Paqe
23
24
Nere11. Al,thoullh we have helL! that the petltioners
of
terns
in
iititl"d oily to the pay scafe of Rs 330-480
f
w'e
the reconneidations of the Third Pay connission ye-ars,.
January 1, 1g73 and onfy after the period of i0
thev b;cane entitled ta the pay scafe of Rs 33A 560 but
as'they have received thc scaJe of Rs 33A-560 since 1973
due to no fault of theirs and that scale rs being
reduced in the year 7gB4 n/ith effect frant January 1,
7g73, it sta onl-y be just and proper not to recover
any excess anount trhirh has afready been pald to then'
we direct it';t no steps should be taken to
Accardingfy,
-or
to adjust any excess afiount patd to the
Tecouer
petitioners due to the faul't of the respondents, the
petitioners being in no way respotlsible for the sane "
32
TrL view of
Ehe lindinqs
recorded dbove lre hold that
Data
EnLry operar,ors Grade A are noL enlitled lor Scale of pay of
Rs 1350 2200 ti e-f 1-1 1986 or lhareafLer merely on the basis of
Lhear guaLil:Lc.Lt i,rns .rr for Lhe fact that Lhey hawe complet'd
Lheir period of requisiLe service I4e furlher hold thaL any
decisiolr renderef by any Tribunal or arll' High CourL conLrary Lo
FLriLher in view .rf Ehe reasons and
our decision
frndrnqs recorde.l above while
e.1
iLle.i Lo Ehe
lrenef
the High aourt, lij
we
hol.l
EhaE
the resPondentss are not
ii as they sought fo]: before the Tribunal or
the impugned or.ders passed bv the
CAT RFr'hes
and the High Courts in fav'Jur. of the respondencs beiitg i]]ega] are
3l
The appeals are allowed
,J
(
SI,DHANSU JYOTI HUKHOPADHAYA)
Page
24
25
(PRAFULI,A
NEl,f DELEI;
DECEI,GIER 09,
c.
.
PAN")
2At4.
PaEa
25
..T.