HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.7970 of 2004 DATED: 03-02-2010 BETWEEN: R.Harishankar …Petitioner AND The Government of India, Rep. by Secretary to Govt., Ministry of Defence, Department of Production & Supplies, Central Secretariat, New Delhi & Others. …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.7970 of 2004 ORDER: This writ petitioner along with others invoked the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench by filing O.A.No.1551 of 2001 for issuance of direction to the respondents to make a provision for grades such as Pharmacist Grade-III (Rs.4500-7000), Grade-II (Rs.5000-8000), Grade-I (Rs.5500- 9000), Chief Pharmacist Grade-II (Rs.6500-10500), Chief Pharmacist (Rs.7400-11500) and Assistant Pharmacy (Rs.7500- 12000) in Pharmacist cadre in Ordnance Factories Estate Hospitals on par with other Government of India Organizations more particularly the Railways and as recommended by IV and V Pay Revision Commissions with all consequential benefits. The case of the petitioner and other applicants before the Tribunal was that the Pharmacists working in hospitals or dispensaries do discharge same duties and responsibilities wherever they are posted. The III Pay Revision Commission having recognized the amount of stagnation in the cadre suggested limited relief of creating selection grade. Whereas, the IV Pay Revision Commission suggested introduction of three grades by abolition of selection grade and that the said recommendation was accepted by the Government of India and some departments have implemented them. But, so far, the same has not been implemented by the Ordnance Factories Organizations, but implemented only part of the recommendation to the extent of withdrawing the selection grade, which resulted in availability of only one rank in Pharmacist cadre. Subsequently, the V Pay Revision Commission proceeded on the assumption that three grades already exist and suggested for revision of three grades upwards and suggested for creation of one more grade at the top as Special Grade. The Jabalpur Bench of the Tribunal by its order, dated 6.8.1996 in O.A.No.54 of 1990 concluded that there is parity in treatment between the Pharmacists in Ordnance Factories and Pharmacists in Railways. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the Pharmacists in the Ordnance Factories Organizations should also be treated on par with the employees of the Railways by further providing avenues of promotions to ensure periodical progress in the service and to remove the stagnation in a particular grade of post to advance their career. Contesting the O.A., the respondents-Ordnance Factory Project, Eddumailaram filed a counter. The Tribunal by the impugned order dismissed the O.A. holding that the matter of pay scales of the petitioner having been settled by IV Pay Revision Commission, the Tribunal cannot be expected to convert itself into a Pay Revision Commission for creation of a cadre restructure by providing grater number of promotional posts which clearly falls within the domain of the policy-makers and the Pay Commission set up for the said purpose and that the successive Pay Revision Commissions after taking into consideration the anomalies provided certain reliefs one such relief being the Assured Career Progression Scheme which provides relief for those who are stagnating for long in different organizations. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the very submissions that were not accepted by the Tribunal would contend that all the Pharmacists in various departments are being recruited by one agency and allotted to different organizations and therefore, there cannot be any discrimination among the Pharmacists. It is now fairly well-settled that where the financial implications are involved, this Court sitting under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot issue directions particularly for creation of posts with particular pay scales for the career advancement of the employees, which is the exclusive domain of the policy-makers i.e. the respective organizations keeping in view of the financial resources for creation of such avenues. The Tribunal after giving cogent reasons rightly concluded that the dispute raised by the petitioner is not within its domain it in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in Harbans Lal and Others v. State of H.P. in W.P.(Civil) No.548 of 1987, dated 1.8.1989, wherein it was held that ‘pay-scale can only be compared with those employed under the same management or establishment’. In view of the same, no infirmity is discernable with the impugned order of the Tribunal warranting interference by this Court. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. _______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. FEBRUARY 03, 2010 Tsr.