IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. NO. 10495-CAT OF 2006 & connected petitions. Date of Decision: February 9, 2011 Union of India and others …Petitioner Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present: Ms. Renu Bala Sharma, Central Govt. Standing Counsel, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Kailash Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent(s). 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. This order shall dispose of a bunch of 8 petitions*, which have been filed by the Union of India and its officers under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging various yet similar orders (see footnote) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’), as the question of law and facts are common. The Tribunal has held that the petitioners-Union of India could not have modify the financial benefit of ACP granted to the applicant-respondent(s), vide order dated 3.5.2004 w.e.f. 12.3.2004 in the pay scale of ` 3050-4590 by issuing an order dated 3.3.2005 and down grading them to a lower scale of C.W.P. Nos. 10495-CAT OF 2006 & connected petitions ` 2650-4000. Accordingly, the office memorandum dated 2.5.2001 and clarification dated 5.11.2004 were quashed and directions were issued to the petitioners-Union of India to place the applicant- respondent(s) in the first ACP pay scale of ` 3050-4590 as was done earlier vide order dated 3.5.2004. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner- Union of India and its officers have approached this Court. 2. When the matter came up for admission, the hearing was adjourned sine die on account of the fact that Special Leave to Appeals were pending. It was, however, clarified that the matter be listed for hearing after decision of the appeals. Accordingly, application(s) have now been filed by the petitioners-Union of India with the assertion that Hon’ble the Supreme Court has already taken a decision in Civil Appeal No. 6122 of 2005 (Union of India and others v. Bhagwati Prasad and others) and the matter is covered by order dated 20.10.2009, which reads thus:- “ Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and scrutinized the records, we are satisfied that the findings recorded by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘The Tribunal’) that the respondents are entitled to financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme circulated vide Office Memorandum dated August 9, 1999 and that the clarification issued on February 10, 2000 is not applicable to them as also the consequential direction given for grant/restoration of the financial benefits in terms of the Assured Career Progression Scheme, did not suffer from any legal infirmity and the High Court rightly declined to interfere with the orders of the Tribunal. 2 C.W.P. Nos. 10495-CAT OF 2006 & connected petitions With the aforesaid observations, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 3. Once the matter has attained finality and it has been held that the benefit of ACP could not be withdrawn by any subsequent clarification affecting adversely the interest of the applicant-respondent(s) then there is no escape from the conclusion that the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed and the order(s) passed by the Tribunal are liable to be upheld. 4. As a sequel to the above discussion, these petitions fail and the same are accordingly dismissed. 5. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (T.P.S. MANN) February 9, 2011 JUDGE Pkapoor * Sr. No. Case No. Parties Name Date of the Order of the Tribunal 1. 10494-CAT of 2006 (O&M) Union of India and others v. Ram Parshad and another 20.1.2006, passed in OA No. 515/HR/2005 and 516/HR/2005 2. 10495-CAT of 2006 (O&M) Union of India and others v. Partap Singh and another 20.1.2006, passed in OA No. 515/HR/2005 and 516/HR/2005 3. 10917-CAT of 2007 (O&M) Union of India and others v. Bir Singh and another 14.9.2006, passed in OA No. 591/HR/2005 4. 19234-CAT of 2006 (O&M) Union of India v. Lala Ram and others 12.4.2006, passed in OA Nos. 601/HR/2005, 602/HR/2005, 605/HR/2005, 618/HR/2005 3 C.W.P. Nos. 10495-CAT OF 2006 & connected petitions 5. 19235-CAT of 2006 Union of India and others v. Dharam Pal and another 12.4.2006, passed in OA Nos. 601/HR/2005, 602/HR/2005, 605/HR/2005, 618/HR/2005 6. 19236-CAT of 2006 Union of India and others v. Mangal Singh and another 12.4.2006, passed in OA Nos. 601/HR/2005, 602/HR/2005, 605/HR/2005, 618/HR/2005 7. 19237-CAT of 2006 Union of India and others v. Nand Ram and another 12.4.2006, passed in OA Nos. 601/HR/2005, 602/HR/2005, 605/HR/2005, 618/HR/2005 8. 20665-CAT of 2006 (O&M) Union of India and others v. Jagmohan Singh and others 22.5.2006, passed in OA Nos. 614/HR/2005, (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (T.P.S. MANN) February 9, 2011 JUDGE Pkapoor 4