Prasenjit Mandal, J. - (1.) This is a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 18-7-2005 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Branch, in O.A.No. 114 of 1998. By the said order the learned Tribunal has dismissed the application of the applicants. So the order is under challenge by way of the writ application.
(2.) The facts of the case in brief is that the applicants have been working as constables in the Bureau of Police Research and Development (henceforth shall be called as "BPR & D"). The said BPR & D is a Central Police Organisation like other branches of the Central Police Organisations such as C.B.I., I.B., R.A.W. and Delhi Police. Prior to 1-1-1986, that is, before the 4th pay Commission the pay scale of the constables working in all the Police Organisations was Rs. 225 - 308 for matriculates and Rs. 210 - 270 for non-matriculates. But in the 4th Pay Commission the pay scale of the constables working in the BPR & D was fixed at Rs. 825 - 1,200 for matriculates and Rs. 800 - 1,150 for non-matriculates whereas the scale of pay of other constables working in C.B.I., I.B., R.A.W. and Delhi Police was fixed at Rs. 950 - 1,400 for matriculates and Rs. 825 - 1,200 for matriculates. Similarly, the pay scale of the constables working in the BPR &D was fixed at Rs. 2,750 - 4,400 for matriculates and Rs. 2,650 - 4,000 for non-matriculates in the 5th Pay Commission with effect from 1-1-1996: while the pay scale of constables working in C.B.I., I.B., R.A.W. and Delhi Police was fixed at Rs. 3,050-4,590 for matriculates and Rs. 2750 - 4400 for non-matriculates with effect from 1-1-1996. Though the applicants have been discharging their duties similar to that of the constables of the other Central Police Organisations as stated above, discrimination had been made in the said two Pay Commissions. The applicants made several representations for equal pay as granted to the said other organizations but in vein. So the case for equal pay and for declaration that the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission of the Government of India in respect of their pay was ultra vires.
(3.) The respondents have-denied the claim of the applicants for higher pay on the ground that the service conditions, duties, and responsibilities performed by the constables working in the BPR & D and those serving in other Central Police Organisations are not similar. The constables working in C.B.I.. I.B., R.A.W. and Delhi Police discharge more duties and responsibilities. They perform duties round the clock and they have to carry arms and ammunitions. They have to wear uniform. For that reason extra benefits such as extra pay, dress allowance, washing allowance etc. are granted to them and so the responsibilities and duties of the constables working in the BPR & D and those serving in other Central Police Organisations as stated above cannot be said to be identical. Upon due consideration of such factors, the 4th Pay Commission and then the 5th Pay Commission recommended different pay scales for the constables working in the BPR & D and other educational institutions. The matter regarding disparity in pay scales recommended by the 4th Pay Commission was referred to the Anomaly Committee constituted by the Home Ministry at the instance of the writ petitioners and then the Committee did not make any recommendation for upgrading the pay scale of the constables working in the BPR & D and make it at par with the constables working in C.B.I., I.B., R.A.W. and Delhi Police. Then the writ petitioners approached the tribunal. But, they failed to make any representation before the 5th Pay Commission as directed by the Principal Bench of the Tribunal. So, they are estopped from challenging the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission.;