SETHI - (1.) CLAIMS, rival claims and counter claims of the Senior Scientific Assistants (Junior Grade) in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900.00, the Assistant Foremen in the grade of Rs. 2000-3200.00 and Chief Draugtsman in the junior grade of Rs. 2000-3200.00 in the Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE) and Gas Turbine Research Institute (GRTI) in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) before implementation of DRTC are sought to be settled in these appeals which arise out of the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunals of Bangalore and Bombay Benches.
(2.) APPELLANTS in Civil Appeal Nos. 7316-7317/97 had filed OAs 2001 and 2041/95 in the Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench, praying for the issuance of direction to declare that their inclusion as Senior Scientific Assistants in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900.00 appointed upto 25-8-1995 in the grade IV of the DRDO Technical Cadre Research Recruitment Rules was arbitrary and discriminatory. They prayed for a further direction to the respondents to include all such SSAs also in grade II of category III along with Foremen and SSAs (senior grade) in the pay-scale of Rs. 2375-3500.00 and for granting them all the consequential benefits. The applications are shown to have been filed on behalf of the Scientific Workers Association which was claimed to be the recognised association by the Government of India. Civil Appeal No. 7315/97 has also been filed by and on behalf of the Scientific and Technical Workers Association through Shri P. N. Choudhary against the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, passed in O.A. 2311/95 dated 19-8-1996. The aforesaid Original Application was filed by the Assistant Foremen in the pay-sale of Rs. 2000-3200.00 serving in the Defence Research and Development Organisation. They had been brought over to the newly designated level of Senior Technical Assistant (STA) as per the Defence Research and Development Organisation Technical Cadre Recruitment Rules, 1995 (DRTC Rules 1995). Their plea was that their placement at the level of STA in the scale of pay of Rs. 1640-2900.00 along with Senior Scientific Assistants (SSAs), Chief Draughtsman (CDM), Chargeman, Grade-I, (CM-I) and Draughtsman Grade-I (DM-I) was arbitrary and unconstitutional. They specifically challenged Rule 6(3)(b) of the DRTC Rules, 1995 which had placed them en bloc junior to the incumbents of the erstwhile cadre of Chief Draughtsman and Senior Scientific Assistants while determining their seniority in the new grade of STA. They prayed for their placement at a level higher than that of the SSA, Chargeman Grade-I, Draughtsman Grade-I by assigning a pay-scale either equivalent to or higher than the scale in which they were drawing pay as Assistant Foremen. Their application was disposed of by the Tribunal holding that the Rule 6(3)(b) of the DRTC Rules, 1995 in so far as it sought to place the Assistant Foremen en bloc junior to CDMs in the scale of pay of Rs. 2000-3200.00 and SSAs in the scale of pay of Rs. 1640-2900.00 was discriminatory and liable to be struck down. The Tribunal further directed the Department to amend Rule 6(3)(b) of the DRTC Rules, 1995 to provide that the inter se seniority of the incumbents of the posts of CDMs, SSAs and also Assistant Foremen shall be drawn on the basis of the length of their regular service in their original relative seniority in such grades. It was further directed that the applicants therein be ranked en bloc senior to the incumbents of the posts of Drautsman (Grade-I) and Chargeman Grade-I. Directions for promotion from the level of the STA to the Technical Officer (A) was also ordered to be carried out. 3A. Civil Appeal No. 7314/97 is an appeal filed by the Union of India against the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in Original Application No. 2311/95 quashing Rule 6(3)(b) of the DRTC Rules, 1995. Civil Appeal Nos. 3338/96 and 3339/1996 have been filed against the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench, by which various applications filed by the Scientific Staff Association and its Members were dismissed with the observation that "the question of relativities in the pay-scale of different cadres, in the present case between technical and scientific cadres of the DRD and DGI is essentially a matter for expert bodies and even after implementation of the award, if there are any disputes still to be resolved, they are required to be resolved by making appropriate representations to the Vth Pay Commission which is at present going into the question of revision of pay-scale of Central Government staff." The petitioners had made similar prayers projecting the grievances of the SSAs (Junior Grade) as were considered and noticed by the Bangalore Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Bombay Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal noticed that the total number of posts of SSAs in DRDO was 1677 of which 822 posts had been given the benefit of higher pay-scale on the basis of an award passed keeping in view the length of service of the SSAs on the basis of the Arbitration Award.
(3.) BEFORE amendment of the Rules in 1995 the promotion to the post of JSO (Junior Scientific Officer) was made out of the SSA, Foreman and Chief Draughtsman. The then existing organisation was as under :- JUDGEMENT_61_SCALE4_1999Html1.htm After amendment the posts of SSAs in the grade of Rs. 1640-2900, Chief Draughtsman (CDM) in the grade of Rs. 2000-3200 and Assistant Foremen were clubbed together and designated as Senior Technical Assistants in the pay-scale of Rs. 1640-2900.00 being the feeding cadre for promotion (TOA). Whereas the grievance of the Senior Scientific Assistants in the pay-scale of Rs. 1640-2900 was that their placement in the junior grade was unconstitutional being violative in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, the Assistant Foremen felt that their en bloc placement as junior to the SSAs in the grade of Rs. 1640-2900.00 was arbitrary and illegal. As noticed earlier the applicants specifically challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 6(3)(b) of the DRTC Rules, 1995. After the amendment of the Rules and creation of the posts of Senior Technical Assistants being eligible for promotion to TOA, their grievance in so far as it related to promotion has lost all its significance. However, if the SSAs in the grade of Rs. 1640-2900.00 are granted relief as prayed for by giving them the grade of Rs. 2375-3500.00 the position would be totally different as they would be deemed to have automatically been promoted as TOA being eligible for promotion to TOB. It is, therefore, necessary to adjudge their claims first before deciding the other appeals.;