Rules, Rights & Rites -99
I usually post all important items related to official rulings, union news, and other general matters on my YouTube channels: Yourskayveeyes (English) and Anbudan Kayveeyes (Tamil).
However, due to the recent spate of orders and the high volume of information being received, I have not been able to convert every item into a video. Therefore, I am introducing these new slots to post current matters and updates that have not yet been published on YouTube. This ensures you stay informed on every detail, even if a video hasn't been made yet …………….Kayveeyes
Defence against court cases for pay upgradation:
• The document provides inputs for defending court cases and deciding representations concerning the retrospective upgradation of pay scales for Assistant Superintendents of Posts (ASP) to Grade Pay Rs.4800 and Postmaster Service Group 'B' to Grade Pay Rs.5400 effective from January 1, 2006.
• The Department of Expenditure (DoE) has formally declined to extend these pay benefits to similarly placed officers, stating that such an extension would not align with established government policy.
• All Circles are instructed to decide pending representations and contest active court cases at their level using previously provided inputs and new specific arguments.
• The Department argues that the original relief granted by the CAT Hyderabad Bench was "in personam" (limited to the specific applicants) rather than "in rem" (applying to all similarly placed employees).
• Because the High Court dismissed the challenge at the admission stage without examining the merits, and the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) similarly, the judgment is not considered a final and binding precedent for other cases.
• Citing Supreme Court precedents (State of U.P. v. J.P. Chaurasia and Union of India v. P.V. Hariharan), the Department asserts that fixing pay scales and grade pay is a matter of government policy and lies strictly within the domain of the executive.
• The memorandum notes that changing pay scales for one category can have a "cascading effect" on others, and therefore, Pay Commissions are the proper authority to decide these issues rather than Tribunals or Courts.
• While Inspectors of Posts received a retrospective upgrade in 2017, the Government consciously chose not to extend this to higher hierarchical posts like ASP. Instead, these cadres were upgraded to Levels 8 and 9 only from January 1, 2016, based on 7th CPC recommendations.
• The decision to limit the upgrade to 2016 onwards was a policy choice based on financial, structural, and administrative factors, which the Department maintains courts should not interfere with.
Post a Comment