- (1.) - Special leave granted.
(2.) The appellant is the Head of the Engineering Department in the Central Polytechnic at Chandigarh. He moved the Central Administrative Tribunal for a direction for fixation of his pay at Rs. 1,100/- in the scale of Rs. 750-50-1300 plus Rs. 100/- special allowance with effect from November 30, 1977, and for appropriate fitment of his pay in the revised grade. His application was registered as O.A. No. 10 of 1986 before the Principal Bench of the Tribunal at Delhi and by the decision on 22-7-1986, the Tribunal gave the following directions : "......the petition is allowed with the direction that the petitioner's pay should be fixed at Rs. 1,100/- in the scale of Rs. 750-50-1300/- along with the Special Pay attached to the post, with effect from the date of his joining the post of Head of Department (Civil Engineering). Central polytechnic, Chandigarh. The subsequent increments will be paid to him from the dates they fell due. The petitioner will also be entitled to arrears of pay and allowances in the light of the said fixation. It is further directed that the petitioner should be paid joining time pay and Travelling Allowance from the station of his last posting under the Maharashtra State Government i.e. Nanded to Chandigarh as admissible under the rules. This order will be implemented within two months from the date of its receipt by the Chandigarh Administration." On the allegation that the directions had not been fully complied with, the appellant moved an application for contempt which was registered as C.C.P. No. 19 of 1986. Appellant's stand was that there had been part compliance of the directions and to the extent the directions were not complied with contempt has been committed. The Tribunal came to hold that there has been full compliance of the directions and in case the appellant had any other grievance a separate application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act lay and the proceedings in contempt were not appropriate. It is this decision which is assailed in this appeal by special leave.
(3.) We have heard the appellant-in-person and Mr. Jitendra Sharma for the respondent at considerable length. Two questions as agreed to by the appellant and learned counsel for the other side fall for consideration (1) Is the appellant entitled to fitment in the revised scale of pay on the basis that the admissible special pay of Rs. 100/- per month had merged into the revised time-scale of pay and, therefore, the salary in the new scale should be correspondingly more and (2) Is appellant entitled to two advance increments on the basis that he possesses a post graduate degree;