K VAMADEVAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANTS eight in number who were working as Superintendents of Central Excise, Trivandrum filed this Original Application aggrieved by A-21 letter dated 6.6.2000 issued to them by the second respondent proposing to deduct the excess amount paid to them on account of stepping of their pay and A-25 Memo dated 24.11.2000 issued by the first respondent rejecting the representation of the 4th applicant for stepping up of his pay on par with the pay of his junior.

(2.) Applicants gave their seniority position in Al and A2 seniority lists of Inspectors of Central Excise as on 1.1.91 and Superintendent of Central Excise as on 1.1.98 respectively as follows in the Original Application:

(3.) RESPONDENTS filed reply statement resisting the claim of the applicants. It was submitted that Sri P.E. Bhaskaran and Shri A. Roy who were juniors to the applicants were promoted to the senior grade prior to the applicants to maintain reservation quota and on promotion they were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 550-900 whereas the applicants were in the pay scale of Rs. 425-800. This promotion granted to SC/ST candidate was as per the norms prescribed by the Government of India. The two juniors who were granted promotion as Inspector of Central Excise (Senior Grade) were in receipt of higher scale of pay with effect from their date of promotion. Subsequently, during 1986 their pay scale was revised after the 4th Pay Commission Report was accepted by the Government and the Junior Officers who were promoted earlier were naturally getting a higher pay. They submitted that the representation of applicants 1 to 4 were received by the 1 st respondent. But the representations of the applicants 5 to 8 were not received by the first respondent and the statement that they had submitted their representation to the first respondent was baseless and incorrect. It was submitted that the All India Federation of Central Excise Gazetted Executive Officers of Kerala Unit approached the first respondent with a request to issue suitable directions to the authorities for stepping up of pay of certain Superintendents with that of their juniors on the basis of the orders of this Tribunal in O.A. 1550/92 dated 6.4.93 and orders dated 23.12.99 regarding the revision of pay of V.I. Anto, Inspector, Central Excise Divisional Office, Kozhikode. The first respondent directed the divisional Heads to refix the pay of the Group B, C and D officers with relevance to the rules and orders. Order consequently passed by the 2nd respondent were not in accordance with the Rules and Regulations governing the subject. It was submitted that when the service books of the applicants were received by the 1st respondent and on verification of the same it was found that the applicants were granted stepping up previously in the cadre of Inspector of Central Excise on the basis of the pay scale of another junior who was also working as Inspector of Central Excise. Therefore the service books along with stepping up of pay orders were returned to the 1st respondent pointing out the error committed by him in ordering the stepping up of pay. It was further submitted that the power under FR 27 could not be delegated to any subordinate officer under the Head of the Department. The officer concerned who issued the wrong stepping up order was directed to issue fresh orders rectifying the wrong order passed. It was submitted that the first respondent had passed the orders regarding Shri T.M. Vijayakumar, Superintendent of Central Excise stepping up his pay to that of Shri V.K. Sivaraman, Superintendent of Central Excise invoking FR 27. It was submitted that the request of the applicants for stepping up of pay for a second time with that of another junior could not be done in accordance with the Rules and Regulations. The 4th applicant had submitted a representation which was received by the first respondent. The applicants claim for stepping up of pay could not be done in accordance with the rules and regulations as per R1(A) OM dated 31.3.81.