" IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF AIACEGEO. THIS IS THE ONLY ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERINTENDENTS OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE THROUGH OUT THE COUNTRY . President Mr.T.Dass and SG Mr. Harpal Singh.

Sunday 21 April 2019

Writ for Time Scale in PB3

Dear friends,
Namaste.
All are requested to kindly go through the following draft writ and supplement accordingly to the mail ravimalik_sweet@yahoo.com immediately-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) NO. _______________ OF 2019
(ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 23/08/2018 IN O. A. NO. 828/2013, PASSED BY LD. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI)

IN THE MATTER OF:
SH. RAVI MALIK,
 S/O LATE SH. MAHABIR SINGH,
 R/O 240, RAZA PUR, GHAZIABAD, UP, PRESENTLY IN DELHI
2. ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE GAZETTED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, DELHI OFFICE AT G-54, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI  THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT:                        SH. C.S. SHARMA                                    
PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS  NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI
2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
3. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, NEW DELHI
4.THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
... RESPONDENTS
APPEAL UNDER WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ON BEHALF OF PETITIONERS AGAINST FINAL ORDER DATED 23/08/2018 IN O. A. NO. 828/2013 (MR. RAVI MALIK AND ANOTHER VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS) PASSED BY LD. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI.
TO
HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF DELHI HIGH COURT
AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES

RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT AS UNDER:
1.     The above named Petitioners seek leave of this Hon’ble court to invoke writ jurisdiction against the Order dated 23/08/2018 in O. A. No. 828/2013 (Ravi Malik & Another vs. Union of India & Others) passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. True copy of order dated 23/08/2018 is annexed at Annexure P-1.
2.     That the Petitioner No. 1 is working as Assistant Commissioner (CGST) and Petitioner No. 2 is a duly registered and recognized association of Central Excise Gazetted Executive Officers of Respondent No. 1.
3.     That the Petitioners herein aggrieved by the disparity in pay scale (NFG/NFU) with similarly placed Group B officers in CSS and CSSS, whom the Respondent No. 3 had granted Non Functional upgradation to the scale of Rs. 8000-13500 notionally w.e.f. 1/1/1996  and actual benefits from 3/10/2003 upon completion of 4 years approved service in the grade as on 01/01/1996, approached ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi vide Original Application No. 828/2013, seeking following relief(s):
“        A. Direct the Respondent to produce the Record of the scheme as to justifying the revision of pay of the Applicants in PB-2;
B. Quash the Order dated 26-5-11 passed by the respondents;
C. Issue Directions to the respondents to grant the time scale under the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 w.e.f. 01/01/1996 to all the Superintendents of Central Excise completing 4 years of regular service and time scale under pay band 3 w.e.f. 01/01/06 to all Superintendents of Central Excise completing 4 years of regular service as being paid to the SOs;
D.  Pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. “
  True copy of the pleadings before the Ld. Tribunal are annexed at Annexure P-2.
4.     That the Petitioners herein seek to raise following question of law for adjudication and determination before this Hon’ble Court:
I.                   Whether the Ld. Tribunal has rightly held that since NFU was introduced in CSS much earlier than CBEC much prior to 6th CPC, there is no reason to interfere with the decision of Respondents?
II.                Whether the ld. Tribunal has rightly upheld the decision of Respondents to deny pay parity (NFU) to the Petitioners with similarly placed Group B Section officers in CSS and CSSS without any justification?
III.             Whether the Respondents can discriminate and deny pay parity to Petitioners with those in CSS and CSSS without any reasonable cause?
5.      That the post of Superintendent in Central Board of Excise and Custom (now CBIC) and Section Officers of CSS have always been comparable and have always been recommended equal pay scales by Central Pay Commissions. The Section Officers of CSS were initially granted the Non Functional pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 after 4 years of service from 3rd October 2003 vide DoPT o/o No. 21/36/03-CS.I, dated 13th November 2003. However, Respondent No.3 vide its subsequent o/o No. 5/4/2005-CS.I dated 25th January 2006 allowed and granted the Non Functional Pay scale on notional basis from 01/01/1996 and actual benefits from 03/10/2003 and O/O No. 5/4/2005-CS-I dated 30/03/2006.  
6.     That the brief facts relevant to the present case are as following:
The Petitioners herein preferred an Original Application (O. A. No. 828/2013 Ravi Malik & Others vs UOI & Ors.)  against the Order dated 26-5-11 passed by the authorized Govt of India, Ministry of finance, Department of Revenue vide which non functional Scale in PB-3 is denied to the Petitioners on arbitrary and discriminatory grounds.
7.     That the Petitioner No. 1 who was Superintendent at the time of filing the Original Application (Now posted as Assistant Commissioner) was under pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500/-. The pay scale was revised  w.e.f. 21-4-04 as Rs. 7500-12000/- .
8.     That the  6th Central Pay Commission( CPC) recommended pay bands in the following manner :
(Pay Band- 1                        Rs 5200-20200
(Pay Band- 2                         Rs 9300-34800
                      (Pay Band- 3                  Rs 15600-39100
                      (Pay Band- 4                          Rs 37400-67000
9.     As  per the recommendations of 6th CPC, the pay scale of Petitioner was bracketed  under grade pay of Rs. 4800/- in Pay Band -2. The Petitioner claimed Time Scale benefits after rendering 4 years of regular  service. Accordingly, Petitioner and other similarly placed Superintendents served in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500/- and revised pay Scale Rs.7500/- - 12000/-. However, the Petitioner and all Superintendents of Central Excise even after revision of Pay Scale remained in Pay Band-2 only i.e.
 Rs. 4800/- as initial pay scale, whereas after revision of pay scale after 4 years of service the pay band also ought to have been up graded to 5400/- in PB-3.
10.                           That the similarly situated  Section officers working in Central Secretariat Service who were having parity with Superintendents of Central Excise have been  granted pay scale of Rs. 7500 – 12000 on 1-1-06 as per 6th CPC  vide  Govt.  notification dated 29-8-08 and have been upgraded from Pay Band-2 4800/- to 5400/- Pay Band -3 after 4 years of service.
11.                        That the said class of Section Officers in CSS having parity in pay Scale with Superintendents Central Excise have been put in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-11500 after grant of benefit of time Scale after 4 years of regular service and have also been granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- in Pay Band-3 from grade pay of Rs. 4800 in Pay Band-2.  The said class of Section Officers having parity with Superintendents, Central Excise have been granted benefit of time scale and have been placed in the pay scale of Rs 8000/ – 13500/  after 4 years  and have also been granted grade pay of Rs. 5400 in PB 3  from grade pay of Rs. 4800 of PB-2 after 4 years.
12.                         That the Petitioner who has been in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 since 21-4-04 has been  granted  benefit of time scale w.e.f. 1-1-06 and placed under revised pay grade pay of Rs. 5400 in PB-2 only whereas the Section Officers have been in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 since 1-1-06 have been  granted  benefit of time scale w.e.f. 1-1-96 and placed under revised pay grade pay of Rs. 5400 in PB-3.
13.                         That the Petitioners  further have been discriminated in as much as the Section Officers who are  in parity with Superintendents Central Excise  in the matter  of pay scale  have been granted  of PB-3 with retrospective  effect with effect from 01/01/1996 whereas the Petitioners  who have been  in the revised pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 much before  the Section Officers are still placed in Grade Pay under PB-2 only. This discrimination is violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India particularly when the Section Officers have been granted pay scale PB-3 after grant of time scale as per 6th CPC vide Govt. Notification dated 29-8-08 and the applicants have been kept in the same pay band of PB-2 in discrimination with the similarly placed  Section Officers  of CSS.
14.                         That the Superintendents of Central Excise and Customs and the Section Officers of CSS have always been comparable and have always been recommended the equal pay scales by all the Central Pay Commissions. The pay scales of both the posts have been always at par in the history. The Section Officers of CSS were initially granted the Non-Functional pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 after 4 years of service from 3rd October, 2003 vide the Order of Department of Personnel & Training issued under No. 21/36/03-CS.I, dated 13th November, 2003 and they were further granted the said Non-Functional pay scale on notional basis from 1st January, 1996 and actual benefits from 3rd October, 2003 vide the Order of Department of Personnel & Training issued under No. 5/4/2005-CS.I, dated 25th January, 2006.
15.                          That  the Section Officers of CSS after completing 4 years of service as on 01.01.1996 were further granted the benefit of notional fixation in this regard w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with all the actual benefits w.e.f. 03.10.2003 vide the above refereed Office Memorandum of Department of Personnel & Training issued under No. 5/4/2005-CS-I, dated 30th March, 2006. 12. However the Superintendents of Central Excise and Customs despite the grant of similar pay scales in the history with the Section Officers of CSS have been deprived and discriminated of the due benefit of Non-Functional pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 at par with the Section Officers of CSS in the same Pay Band-3. The Superintendents of Central Excise and Customs were granted the pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 w.e.f. 21.04.04  in Pay Band-2 while the Section Officers of CSS who were being placed under the lower pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 were placed in higher scale after grant of  the Non-Functional pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 after 4 years of service w. e. f. 01.01.96 in Pay Band-3.
16.                         That despite the fact that there exist no rationale behind denying Superintendents, Central Excise similar upward revision of pay with Section Officers in CSS, the Respondents came out with most innocuous and arbitrary answer that, “After examination, the Department of Expenditure has observed that in the case of CSS etc., the provision of NFS in the pay scale of Rs. 8000- 13, 500/- (Pre revised) existed even prior to 6th CPC, which is not so in the case of Department of Revenue.”
17.                           That Petitioners raised the issue before ld. Tribunal, which disposed of the said O. A. No. 828/2013 vide Order dated 23/08/2018 without considering the arguments urged, submissions and contentions raised in the Original Application.
Hence present Petition.
18.                          GROUNDS OF APPEAL
The Petitioner reiterates and reaffirms the grounds urged in the original application before the learned Tribunal.
Petitioner seeks leave and liberty to urge additional grounds assailing the order under appeal on following amongst other grounds:

A.    Because, order under appeal is bad in eyes of law as the learned Tribunal has passed the said order without considering the facts of the case and in a haste. There are more than one flaw in the order which shows that the ld Tribunal disposed of the matter in a haste without paying any attention to the Facts AND Figures mentioned in the pleadings.
B.   Because, the ld. Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that in an earlier decision of that Tribunal held in O. A. No. 377/266 dated 01/05/2007 that an expert Body like Pay Commission is not needed to rectify / correct the disparity and discrimination in pay scales.
C.   Because, the ld. Tribunal did not consider nor distinguished the case of the Petitioners from the dictum of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Randhir Singh vs UoI & Ors. AIR 1982 SC877.
D.   Because, the ld. Tribunal did not even care to look into the pay structure of the cadres involved in the O. A. and made factually incorrect statements in the Order under appeal.


19.                                  That the parties to the petition are working for gains in Delhi and as such this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon this petition.
20.                                 That Petitioner has not filed any other appeal or SLP against the final order of the ld. Tribunal before any other court or Supreme Court seeking similar relief.
            PRAYER
     In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the Petitioner prays for the following among other reliefs.
1.  May allow the present writ petition with cost in favour of the Petitioner;
2. May quash and set aside the impugned Final Order dated 23/08/2018 in O. A. No. 828/2013 passed by ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench;
3.  May direct the Respondents to grant the time scale under the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500 w.e.f. 01/01/1996 to all the Superintendents of Central Excise completing 4 years of regular service and time scale under pay band 3 w.e.f. 01/01/06 to all Superintendents of Central Excise completing 4 years of regular service as being paid to the SOs;
4.  May be pleased to pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. “

Date:
Place:
PETITIONER
Through
JASVINDER KAUR
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 573, NEW LAWYERS CHAMBER BLOCK
PATIALA HOUSE, NEW DELHI
Contact No.: +91 9312836524

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W. P. (CIVIL) NO. __________ OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:

MR. RAVI MALIK                                    PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER                  RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

I, Ravi malik, s/o Sh. Mahabir Singh, r/o                          , aged about 5 Years, do hereby solemnly affirm and state that:
1.       That I am the Petitioner in the accompanying writ petition and as such fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and in a position to depose this affidavit in the court of law;
2.       That the accompanying writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution against the orders of Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, PB, New Delhi, has been drafted and filed by me, in person;
3. I have done whatsoever inquiry/investigation, which was in my power to do, to collect all data/material which was available and which was relevant for the court to entertain the present petition. I further confirm that I have not concealed in the present petition any
Data /material /information which may have enabled this court to form an opinion whether to entertain the petition or not and/or whether to grant any relief or not.
4. That the annexure appended to the accompanying petition are true and correct copies of the original.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified on this ________ at Delhi, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct and that nothing material has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

CERTIFICATE