it2025_00528 — The nine Applicants, herein, who started their service as Group 'D' employees came to BSNL. Compared to their pay in BSNL, which is less than those who were juniors caused by fixation of their pay in BSNL, this OA is filed to upgrade the pay of the Applicants equal to their juniors and pay arrears. That upgradation of pay of the Applicants is accepted

IT Rules

The nine Applicants, herein, who started their service as Group 'D' employees came to BSNL. Compared to their pay in BSNL, which is less than those who were juniors caused by fixation of their pay in BSNL, this OA is filed to upgrade the pay of the Applicants equal to their juniors and pay arrears. That upgradation of pay of the Applicants is accepted — This is an Order Against (OA) No. 180/00032 filed in 2016 by nine employees of BSNL, who were aggrieved by a pay disparity due to an anomaly in their point-to-point fixation on conversion from Centra... — Facts : There are 9 Applicants in this OA who were Telecom Mechanics. They had filed this OA aggrieved by the refusal of Respondents, BSNL, represented by its Chairman and others controlled by Chairman and pray to step up their pay to that of their junior who started drawing higher pay scale due to anomalies of point-to-point fixation on conversion of their Central Dearness Allowance (CDA) pay scale to Industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) pay scale with effect from 1-10-2000. Applicants started their service as Group-'D' employees in the Department of Telecommunication. They were promoted as Telecom Mechanic on various dates prior to 1-10-2000, the date on which BSNL was incorporated. Their pay scale which was in CDA pay scale was replaced to IDA pay scale of ₹ 4,500-5,800 and ₹ 4,720-6,790. One Shri T.O. Varghese who the Applicants state is junior to them started drawing ₹ 5,225 in IDA in the IDA scale of pay of ₹ 4,000-5,800 applicable to Group 'D' and was granted 9 increments based on point-to- point fixation vide Annexure at A/3 pay fixation memo. Applicants were drawing a pay of ₹ 5,020 and ₹ 4,870 respectively. Pay of Varghese was fixed under FR 22 (i)(a)
(i) vide A/4. Applicants approached the department to set right the anomaly. But no decision was taken. Hence this OA is filed for stepping up their pay on par with their juniors. Tribunal heard both sides. This OA is similar to the judgment enclosed at A/5 of Kerala High Court. "It was held in that judgment that senior's pay is to be stepped up as par with their juniors, when the anomaly is set right by Respondents giving the Applicants higher pay by granting personal pay to senior which was set aside by Tribunal. On appeal, the verdict of Tribunal was accepted by the High Court. Further, High Court also observed that fresh pay fixation scheme of pay in IDA scale keeping in mind the anomalies that occur not only in that particular case but also in other cases. The decision of anomaly committee canceled by this Tribunal shall not be reintroduced in any other from." The issue on hand is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment viz, A/5, A/6 and A/8. In the recent OA namely 180/19/2015 and 180/730/2014, Tribunal allowed stepping up of pay of the Applicants therein at par with juniors with all consequential benefit. Shri. Varghese promoted as Telecom Mechanic much before the formation of BSNL on 1-10-2000 was a regular Hazdoor only. Respondents differentiate the case of Varghese from that of Applicants which the Tribunal held as circumlocutory argument to escape the aftermath of the afore-mentioned judicial decision. Respondents brought out the delay in filing this case referring to number of Apex Court judgments. Those arguments were countered by Applicants any pointing out decisions of Apex court in similar cases. Apex Court held in the case State of Madhya Pradesh and others v. Yogendra Shrivastava, [ (2012) 12 SCC 538 ] that "where the issue relates to payment or fixation of salary or any allowances, the challenge is not barred by limitation or doctrine of laches as the denial of benefits occurs every month when salary is paid thereby giving rise to fresh cause of action based on continuing wrong." Tribunal held that the claim of the Applicant is not barred by any limitation or doctrine of laches. There is no dispute for the Respondents that there is indeed an anomaly in the scale of pay drawn by Applicants vis-a-vis higher pay received by their junior Shri. T.O. Varghese. Admittedly Shri. Varghese was promoted as T.M. only on 6-12-2002 much after formation of BSNL while Applicants have been promoted as TMS while they were under the DoT i.e. even before formation of BSNL on 1-10-2000. This very situation is certainly to the chagrin of the Applicant even though Shri T.O. Varghese was promoted as TM after the formation of BSNL. No doubt in such cases, inter seniority equity demands rectification of the anomaly by stepping up the pay of the seniors. The above-said judgment of Kerala High Court have attained final. Hence Respondents have no option but to implement the same in the case of Applicants." It is judicially determined that seniors in BSNL following introduction of IDA pay scale have to be rectified by stepping up the pay of affected seniors. The Respondents attribute in this case is puerile. Applicants attribute such anomaly because of point-to-point fixation. In view of the matter relating to pay and allowance of the Applicant, the challenge is not barred by limitation or by laches as it is a continuing wrong as observed by Apex Court, even though the fixation of pay now prayed is justified.

IT Rules

The nine Applicants, herein, who started their service as Group 'D' employees came to BSNL. Compared to their pay in BSNL, which is less than those who were juniors caused by fixation of their pay in BSNL, this OA is filed to upgrade the pay of the Applicants equal to their juniors and pay arrears. That upgradation of pay of the Applicants is accepted — This is an Order Against (OA) No. 180/00032 filed in 2016 by nine employees of BSNL, who were aggrieved by a pay disparity due to an anomaly in their point-to-point fixation on conversion from Centra... — Facts : There are 9 Applicants in this OA who were Telecom Mechanics. They had filed this OA aggrieved by the refusal of Respondents, BSNL, represented by its Chairman and others controlled by Chairman and pray to step up their pay to that of their junior who started drawing higher pay scale due to anomalies of point-to-point fixation on conversion of their Central Dearness Allowance (CDA) pay scale to Industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) pay scale with effect from 1-10-2000. Applicants started their service as Group-'D' employees in the Department of Telecommunication. They were promoted as Telecom Mechanic on various dates prior to 1-10-2000, the date on which BSNL was incorporated. Their pay scale which was in CDA pay scale was replaced to IDA pay scale of ₹ 4,500-5,800 and ₹ 4,720-6,790. One Shri T.O. Varghese who the Applicants state is junior to them started drawing ₹ 5,225 in IDA in the IDA scale of pay of ₹ 4,000-5,800 applicable to Group 'D' and was granted 9 increments based on point-to- point fixation vide Annexure at A/3 pay fixation memo. Applicants were drawing a pay of ₹ 5,020 and ₹ 4,870 respectively. Pay of Varghese was fixed under FR 22 (i)(a)
(i) vide A/4. Applicants approached the department to set right the anomaly. But no decision was taken. Hence this OA is filed for stepping up their pay on par with their juniors. Tribunal heard both sides. This OA is similar to the judgment enclosed at A/5 of Kerala High Court. "It was held in that judgment that senior's pay is to be stepped up as par with their juniors, when the anomaly is set right by Respondents giving the Applicants higher pay by granting personal pay to senior which was set aside by Tribunal. On appeal, the verdict of Tribunal was accepted by the High Court. Further, High Court also observed that fresh pay fixation scheme of pay in IDA scale keeping in mind the anomalies that occur not only in that particular case but also in other cases. The decision of anomaly committee canceled by this Tribunal shall not be reintroduced in any other from." The issue on hand is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment viz, A/5, A/6 and A/8. In the recent OA namely 180/19/2015 and 180/730/2014, Tribunal allowed stepping up of pay of the Applicants therein at par with juniors with all consequential benefit. Shri. Varghese promoted as Telecom Mechanic much before the formation of BSNL on 1-10-2000 was a regular Hazdoor only. Respondents differentiate the case of Varghese from that of Applicants which the Tribunal held as circumlocutory argument to escape the aftermath of the afore-mentioned judicial decision. Respondents brought out the delay in filing this case referring to number of Apex Court judgments. Those arguments were countered by Applicants any pointing out decisions of Apex court in similar cases. Apex Court held in the case State of Madhya Pradesh and others v. Yogendra Shrivastava, [ (2012) 12 SCC 538 ] that "where the issue relates to payment or fixation of salary or any allowances, the challenge is not barred by limitation or doctrine of laches as the denial of benefits occurs every month when salary is paid thereby giving rise to fresh cause of action based on continuing wrong." Tribunal held that the claim of the Applicant is not barred by any limitation or doctrine of laches. There is no dispute for the Respondents that there is indeed an anomaly in the scale of pay drawn by Applicants vis-a-vis higher pay received by their junior Shri. T.O. Varghese. Admittedly Shri. Varghese was promoted as T.M. only on 6-12-2002 much after formation of BSNL while Applicants have been promoted as TMS while they were under the DoT i.e. even before formation of BSNL on 1-10-2000. This very situation is certainly to the chagrin of the Applicant even though Shri T.O. Varghese was promoted as TM after the formation of BSNL. No doubt in such cases, inter seniority equity demands rectification of the anomaly by stepping up the pay of the seniors. The above-said judgment of Kerala High Court have attained final. Hence Respondents have no option but to implement the same in the case of Applicants." It is judicially determined that seniors in BSNL following introduction of IDA pay scale have to be rectified by stepping up the pay of affected seniors. The Respondents attribute in this case is puerile. Applicants attribute such anomaly because of point-to-point fixation. In view of the matter relating to pay and allowance of the Applicant, the challenge is not barred by limitation or by laches as it is a continuing wrong as observed by Apex Court, even though the fixation of pay now prayed is justified.

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text