Dismissed

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Ms Jeena Anil Kumar

Karnataka HC24 Aug 2021WP/7989/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's order which allowed a responsive employee's claim for higher grade pay. Upholding the CAT, the Court held that the Apex Court judgment on grade pay applicability was squarely applicable, rejecting the petitioner's delay argument.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed holding no infirmity in the impugned CAT order.

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

¶7

W.P.No.7989/2017 (S – CAT)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE PEENYA NO 62, 3^RD CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUB URB YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU - 560022

¶10

CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EPFO BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN No.14, BHIKAJI CAMA PALACE NEW DELHI - 110066

¶11

ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE PEENYA No.62, 3^RD CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUB URB YESHWANTHPUR BENGALURU – 560022. ...PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI K.S.VENKATARAMANA, ADV.)

¶13

AND :

¶14

Ms.JEENA ANIL KUMAR W/O ANIL KUMAR AGE 47 YEARS, R/O No.9041, LEMSDEN PRESTIGE, WELLINGTON PARK, GANGAMMA CIRCLE, BENGALURU -560013.

¶15

UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶16

¶17

MINISTRY OF LABOUT SHRAM SHAKTI BHAVAN NEW DELHI – 110011. …RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI VENKATESH KUMAR.B.S., ADV. FOR R-1; SRI SANJAY NAIR, CGC, FOR R-2.)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TOQUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN O.A.NO.170/01720/2015 DATED 21.10.2016 AT ANNEXURE-G; AND ETC.,

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner has assailed the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [‘CAT’ for short] in O.A.No.170/01720/2015 dated 21.10.2016 whereby the Original Application filed by the respondent herein – Smt.Jeena Anil Kumar has been allowed.

¶23

Succinctly stated the facts are that the respondent No.1 joined the services of the Employees Provident Fund Organization, Maharashtra Region as Lower Division Clerk on 27.04.1992 and was posted at Thane office. She was promoted on regular basis as Upper Division Clerk on clearing the Departmental

¶24

¶25

Examination, thereby she continued at Thane office up to May 2006 as Social Security Assistant. On the request

¶26

of respondent No.1, she was transferred from

¶27

Maharashtra Region to Karnataka as per orders dated 02.05.2006 as the job of her spouse was at Bengaluru, subject to the terms that she will be accommodated as a junior most Upper Division Clerk/Social Security Assistant [SSA] in the transferred region with effect from the date of joining and the pay will be fixed in the cadre of SSA as per relevant rules. Accordingly, the respondent got transferred and reported to duty in the cadre of Upper Division Clerk/SSA with effect from 29.05.2006 at Regional office, Employees’ Provident Fund Organization, Bengaluru. On implementation of 6^th pay commission report, the pay of the respondent has been fixed at Rs.9,960/- with grade pay of Rs.2,800/-in pay scale of Rs.9300-34800/- in adherence of Fundamental Rules – FR15[a] with effect from 29.05.2006. The respondent claimed grade pay of Rs.4,200/- with effect from

¶28

¶29

01.04.2004 relying on the letter of regional PF Commissioner, Regional office, Mumbai dated 22.09.2008 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in SLP[C].Nos.31311-31312/2012. The request of the respondent having been rejected by the petitioner, the respondent approached the CAT seeking for the appropriate reliefs. Original application filed by the respondent has been allowed by the CAT placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above. Hence, this writ petition.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners strongly argued that the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench confirmed by the High Court of Kerala and the Hon'ble Apex Court dismissing the Special Leave Petitions filed by the Central Provident Fund Commissioner and Others would not be applicable to the present case. However, CAT proceeded to allow

¶31

the application merely relying on the said ruling.

¶32

¶33

Learned counsel argued that the pay scale of the respondent was not reduced after transfer and hence the case on hand stands on a different footing.

¶34

Learned counsel for the respondents

¶35

justifying the impugned order, argued that the issue involved herein is no more res integra in view of the order of the CAT, Ernakulam Bench having reached finality as per the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP[C]Nos.31311-31312/2012.

¶36

We have carefully considered the rival

¶37

submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶38

The sole point that arises for our

¶39

consideration is, –

¶40

Whether the pay scale is to be fixed under FR 22 [I] [a] [1] or under FR 15 [a]?

¶41

It is discernable from the order of the CAT, Ernakulam Bench in O.A.No.418/2010 [D.D.

¶42

¶43

24.02.2012], the applicants therein who were Senior

¶44

Social Security Assistants [Sr.SSA] in the Employees Provident Fund Organization got inter Regional transfer to Kerala in the year 2008 subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶45

[i] They will be accommodated as a junior most SSA in the Transferred Region with effect from the date of joining;

¶46

[ii] Their pay will be fixed in the cadre of SSA as per relevant rules;

¶47

[iii] The transfer being allowed at their own request, they will not be entitled to any TA/DA and joining time.

¶48

Referring to O.M dated 14.02.2006 and O.M

¶49

dated 21.10.2009 which pertains to fixation of pay of employees who seek transfer to the lower post, it has been observed by the Ernakulam Bench that the transfer cannot be said to be a post with less pay as per

¶50

the terms and conditions of transfer, but to the same cadre post of SSA with loss of seniority only. Therefore,

¶51

- 7 -

¶52

it is only fair that the specific conditions of transfer only should apply, the condition of fixation of pay as per relevant rules is not relevant as the terms and conditions of inter regional transfers are mutually agreed upon by the Government and employees who seek it. Accordingly, original applications were allowed holding that the applicants therein were entitled to get pay scale in the Pay Band of Rs.9300-34800 plus Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- instead of the reduced pay scale fixed by the Union of India and others [respondents therein] applying FR15[a]. The said order has been confirmed by the High Court of Kerala and on further appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court by the GPF Commissioner and Others, the same came to be dismissed.

¶53

In the present case, Regional PF

¶54

Commissioner, Regional office, Mumbai vide letter dated 22.09.2008 addressed to the Regional PF Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Bengaluru [Annexure-A2] has informed that the respondent

¶55

¶56

Smt.Jeena Anil Kumar SSA, has already been placed in the pay scale of Rs.4400-125-7000 and then in the pay scale of Rs.5000-150-8000 simultaneously with effect from 01.04.2004 vide office order dated 25.04.2008. Thus, requested for implementation of the said order before fixation of the 6^th Pay Commission. The name of the respondent Smt.Jeena Anil Kumar is found at Sl.No.134 in the list of SSAs promoted to the post of Senior SSAs. The petitioner at Annexure-A6 dated 04.06.2013, has fixed the pay scale with effect from 05.11.2012 based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP[C]Nos.31311-31312/2012 and further informed that the respondent, SSA cannot claim seniority in Karnataka Region based on the above pay fixation. These two documents would make it clear that with effect from 01.04.2004, notionally the respondent was promoted to the post of Senior SSA and the petitioners themselves have applied the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court cited supra to the case of the respondent.

¶57

- 9 -

¶58

Having regard to these Annexures-A2 and A6, it cannot be gainsaid that the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court cited supra, is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The CAT has rightly observed that the eligibility must be counted from the date on which the respondent is eligible, not from the date of passing of the order by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The interpretation given by the petitioners in applying the ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court only with effect from 05.11.2012 is not justifiable. We find no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned.

¶59

Writ petition stands dismissed accordingly.

¶60

Sd/JUDGE

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

NC.

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Ms Jeena Anil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Ms Jeena Anil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Swamynathan K Vs the Depot Manager

Smt Bangaramma Vs Sri Mohan Kumar S K

B Roja Vs M/S United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Kamalamma

Smt Gangamma Vs Cargo Wings Logistics Ltd.

Sri K D Srinivasappa Vs Sri G R Dhananjaya