Dismissed

G. Nagarajarao v. The Director General

Telangana HC9 Jun 2014WP/30117/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's order rejecting the applicants' claim for Career Advancement Scheme benefits. The court held that since the applicants had already availed two financial upgradations, they were not entitled to further benefits under the scheme.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions to be closed.

G. Nagarajarao Vs The Director General — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.30117 of 2013

¶4

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C. Bhanu)

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order dated 24-022011 in O.A.No.977 of 2009 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’).

¶6

2. The petitioners herein are the applicants, and the respondents herein are the respondents in O.A.No.977 of 2009. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein after referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

¶7

3. The applicants filed O.A. challenging the proceedings of the first respondent bearing No.Admn.A/A4/6334/89, dated 23-10-2008 in so far as it relates to decision to treat the up-gradation given to the applicants from group ‘D’ scales to group ‘C scales as first upgradation under Career Advancement Scheme i.e., rejecting the claim of the applicants for the benefit under Career Advancement Scheme on completion of 10 years of service from the date of their initial appointment. The Tribunal considering the material on record, dismissed the O.A. Hence, this writ petition.

¶8

4. It is not in dispute before this Court that the applicants were initially recruited as Asst. Wireman during the years 1988, 1989,

¶9

1991 and 1994 respectively. It is also not in dispute that though they were initially recruited as Asst. Wireman, the official respondents converted the said post into Wireman as per the proceedings issued by the Director General, Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Government of India, dated 07-05-1997. It is not in dispute before this Court that the applicants have availed the benefit of two financial up-gradations. The Career Advancement Scheme was introduced by an office order No.550 dated 11-02-1994. As per this scheme one of the important aspects is the employee who have not been promoted on regular basis even after completion of 10 years of service in the same post in which they are directly recruited, are eligible for consideration for grant of next higher scale which is purely personal by temporary upgradation of the basic pay, without any change in the status, nature of duties and basic designation.

¶10

5. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the upgradation of the applicants is not a promotion. Therefore, they are entitled for upgradation in terms of Career Advancement Scheme on completion of certain period as prescribed in the scheme.

¶11

6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for official respondents contended that the applicants have already availed two financial up-gradations and that when there is no promotional avenues and there was no change in the pay scale of the applicants, then only they are entitled for the benefits provided under the Career Advancement Scheme, therefore, he prays to dismiss the writ petition as the Tribunal has passed reasoned order, which does not suffer from any infirmities or illegalities.

¶12

7. To substantiate the contentions, the learned counsel for the applicants placed strong reliance on a decision reported in BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED V. R. SANTHAKUMARI

¶13

VELUSAMY AND OTHERS^[1] , wherein it was held as follows:

¶14

“Upgradation merely confers a financial benefit by raising the scale of pay of the post without there being movement from a lower position to a higher position. In an upgradation, the candidate continues to hold the same post without any change in the duties and responsibilities but merely gets a higher pay scale.”

¶15

From the above decision, it is clear that upgradation cannot be equated with a promotion, but it shall be said to be a financial pay and the nature of work of the individual is one and the same even after upgradation of the scale of pay. But the whole object of the Career Advancement Scheme is to give some financial benefit when there is stagnation in the post for any reason for a particular period.

¶16

8. It is not in dispute that the applicants availed two financial upgradations while working as Pump Operator or Wireman with the official respondents organization. Though it cannot be termed as a promotion, but the whole object of the Career Advancement Scheme is to give some financial benefit when there was stagnation in scale of pay. It is not a stagnation with regard to the pay scales because admittedly the pay of the applicants have been upgraded on two occasions. Therefore, Career Advancement Scheme is not applicable to the case of the applicants since they have already availed two upgradations. The Career Advancement Scheme is only applicable to those individuals who are drawing pay continuously without there being any change or enhancement of the pay scale. Therefore, after considering all these aspects,

¶17

the Tribunal has rightly dismissed the same and that order needs no interference by this Court.

¶18

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶19

______________________ JUSTICE K.C. BHANU

¶20

_______________ JUSTICE ANIS June 09, 2014 PN

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU AND

¶22

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS