Case: S.L. Ahmed &amp; Others Vs. Union Of India &amp; Others

pay and special pay. The Commission prescribed a scale of Rs. 225-308 for the post of Naik, but did not make any separate recommendation in respect of the posts of Radio Operators Grade- III (Naik). Inasmuch as before the revision of the pay scale the scale of a Naik and Radio Operator Grade-III (Naik) was the same, that is to say, Rs. 85-110, the revised pay scale for the post of Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) was raised to the same level as that prescribed for the post of Naik, that is to say, Rs. 225-308, and in view of their special qualifications and the specialized nature of their duties Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) were given a special pay of Rs. 30 also.9. The petitioners urge that posts in other departments of the Central Government, for which the minimum qualification was the Matriculation examination and an additional requirement of training, carried the pay scale of Rs. 260-430 and since that requirement was also the basis of appointments to the post of Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) they should also be held entitled to that pay scale. Now the revised pay has been given with effect from January 1, 1973 and on that date the qualification in the case of a Naik was the Middle School Examination, and it was only with effect from January 24, 1975 that the qualification was raised to the Matriculation examination. As Naiks and Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) had been uniformly treated at par in the matter of that basic qualification it is not open to the petitioners to base their claim with reference to a qualification which did not exist on January 1, 1973.10. In support of their claim to the pay scale Rs. 260-430, the petitioners have drawn our attention to the circumstance that the immediately next senior category, Radio Operators Grade-II, carried the revised scale Rs. 330-480 and, it is contended, the revised pay scale in the case of Radio Operators Grade-III should not be far below. It is not for this Court, we think, to examine how far below should be the revised pay scale of the Radio Operators Grade III. If the Government has prescribed a particular pay scale in respect of them, all that the Court can do is to merely pronounce on the validity of that fixation. In the event that the Court finds that the prescription is contrary to law it will strike it down and direct the Government to take a fresh decision in the matter. It is a very different case from one where this Court has sought to prescribe pay scales in appeals directly preferred from an award of the Labour Court dealing with such a matter. In the latter case, this Court in its appellate jurisdiction can be regarded as enjoying all the jurisdiction which the Labour Court enjoys. That is not so in the present case.11. We are satisfied that Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) have to be considered substantially on the same basis as Naiks in the Central Reserve Police Force, and it is because of their special qualifications and of the specialised nature of their duties that they have been provided a special pay in addition. It may be mentioned that ever since 1975 Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) are selected only from the rank of Constables on the General Duty Side. The revised pay scale of Radio Operators of the rank of Head Constable as well as Head Constables on General Duty is Rs. 260-350, with a special pay of Rs. 40 to Head Constables (Radio Operators). This post is the immediately next higher post above the rank of Naik, and it is apparent that there would be no justification of giving to the petitioners, who are junior in rank, the pay scale Rs. 260-430.12. The petitioners have also contended that they should be paid at par with comparable Government employees on the civil side. This claim is refuted by the respondents who point out that the petitioners are entitled to certain benefits not available to the others. Learned Counsel for the respondents has listed before us a number of such benefits. It is pointed out that the petitioner are entitled to casual leave for a period of twenty days as against casual leave for a period of twelve days for Government employees on the civil side, earned leave for a period of sixty days as against earned leave for a period of thirty three days for Government employees on the civil side, and rent free accommodation or house allowance at 10% of the salary in contrast to Government employees on the civil side who are liable to pay 10% of the salary if accommodation is provided.13. We are not satisfied that the petitioners are entitled to the pay scale Rs. 260 430.14. The second point requires us to consider the validity of the refixation of the pay of the petitioners when they were receiving Rs. 250 with a special pay of Rs. 30. According to the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, the existing pay scale of a Government servant drawing basic pay upto Rs, 1800 per month was to be augmented by an amount representing five percent of the basic pay subject to a minimum of Rs. 15 and a maximum of Rs. 50. The Government of India Memorandum No. F. 67/II/13/74-IC dated May 17, 1974 directed that special pay was not to be included in the existing emoluments for the purpose of determining the accretion where in addition to the revised pay also. The revised pay actually paid to the petitioners initially was computed in error inasmuch as when fixing the pay in the revised scale the special pay was taken into account for the purpose of computing the accretion. It, therefore, became necessary to recompute the amount payable to the petitioners and to reduce it to the level now paid to them. It has not been shown to us that the basis adopted for refixation of the pay is invalid.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 0

Explanation:
0[ds]6. So far as the deduction is concerned, this Court has already directed by its order dated December 19, 1979 that the Government should restore to the petitioners the excess amount already recovered from them. Nevertheless, it will be necessary to examine the validity of the refixation of the salary now paid to the petitioners inasmuch as that question is relevant for the period commencing from the date from which salary has been actually paid on the refixedthe basis of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, the pay scales of all Central Government employees, including personnel in the para-military forces, were revised with effect from January 1, 1973. Under the original pay scales, Naik Radio Operators were placed on the scale Rs. 85-110 with a special pay of Rs. 30 in view of their special qualifications and the specialized nature of their duties. They were entitled to allowances calculated on the aggregate of their basic pay and special pay. The Commission prescribed a scale of Rs. 225-308 for the post of Naik, but did not make any separate recommendation in respect of the posts of Radio Operators Grade- III (Naik). Inasmuch as before the revision of the pay scale the scale of a Naik and Radio Operator Grade-III (Naik) was the same, that is to say, Rs. 85-110, the revised pay scale for the post of Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) was raised to the same level as that prescribed for the post of Naik, that is to say, Rs. 225-308, and in view of their special qualifications and the specialized nature of their duties Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) were given a special pay of Rs. 30 also.We are satisfied that Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) have to be considered substantially on the same basis as Naiks in the Central Reserve Police Force, and it is because of their special qualifications and of the specialised nature of their duties that they have been provided a special pay in addition. It may be mentioned that ever since 1975 Radio Operators Grade-III (Naik) are selected only from the rank of Constables on the General Duty Side. The revised pay scale of Radio Operators of the rank of Head Constable as well as Head Constables on General Duty is Rs. 260-350, with a special pay of Rs. 40 to Head Constables (Radio Operators). This post is the immediately next higher post above the rank of Naik, and it is apparent that there would be no justification of giving to the petitioners, who are junior in rank, the pay scale Rs. 260-430.12. The petitioners have also contended that they should be paid at par with comparable Government employees on the civil side. This claim is refuted by the respondents who point out that the petitioners are entitled to certain benefits not available to the others. Learned Counsel for the respondents has listed before us a number of such benefits. It is pointed out that the petitioner are entitled to casual leave for a period of twenty days as against casual leave for a period of twelve days for Government employees on the civil side, earned leave for a period of sixty days as against earned leave for a period of thirty three days for Government employees on the civil side, and rent free accommodation or house allowance at 10% of the salary in contrast to Government employees on the civil side who are liable to pay 10% of the salary if accommodation is provided.13. We are not satisfied that the petitioners are entitled to the pay scale Rs. 260 430.14. The second point requires us to consider the validity of the refixation of the pay of the petitioners when they were receiving Rs. 250 with a special pay of Rs. 30. According to the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, the existing pay scale of a Government servant drawing basic pay upto Rs, 1800 per month was to be augmented by an amount representing five percent of the basic pay subject to a minimum of Rs. 15 and a maximum of Rs. 50. The Government of India Memorandum No. F. 67/II/13/74-IC dated May 17, 1974 directed that special pay was not to be included in the existing emoluments for the purpose of determining the accretion where in addition to the revised pay also. The revised pay actually paid to the petitioners initially was computed in error inasmuch as when fixing the pay in the revised scale the special pay was taken into account for the purpose of computing the accretion. It, therefore, became necessary to recompute the amount payable to the petitioners and to reduce it to the level now paid to them. It has not been shown to us that the basis adopted for refixation of the pay is invalid.