In the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench at New Delhi
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OA No.98/2009 1 IN THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH AT NEW DELHI O.A. No. 98/2009 L/Nk Bhawani Singh .........Applicant Versus Union of India & Others .......Respondents For applicant : Maj (Retd) K. Ramesh, Advocate. For respondents: Sh.Mohan Kumar, Advocate with Capt Alifa Akbar. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. MATHUR, CHAIRPERSON. HON’BLE LT. GEN. M.L. NAIDU, MEMBER. O R D E R 28.07.2010 1. Applicant by this petition has prayed that respondents no. 1 to 3 may be directed to quash the impugned order of Army Headquarters dated 30.01.2009 and respondents may also be directed to maintain earlier status quo prior to 1981 and released vacancies for promotion to higher cadres of Draughtsman OA No.98/2009 2 Topography and Survey Topography vis a vis the lower cadre of Surveyor Sapper with immediate effect. 2. Applicant was enrolled in the Indian Army on 28.12.1995 as a Sapper in higher trade of Draughtsman Topo and he had an unblemished service record. There were various grades which were sought to be reduced as per recommendations of 6th Central Pay Commission and the Government merged all the grades by passing order dated 30.01.2009 which reads as under:- Integrated HQ of MoD (Army) Adjutant General’s Branch Addl Dte Gen MP/MP 8 (I of R) West Block III, R.K. Puram New Delhi 110066 A/20182/MP 8 (I of R) (a) 30 Jan 2009 (All Record Offices) RATIONLISATION OF TRADES: PERSONNEL BELOW OFFICER RANK (PBOR) 1. A copy of this HQ Note No.B/10035/Rationalisation/MP-3 (PBOR) dated 05 Jan 2009 alongwith its enclosures is forwarded herewith for info and necessary action. While implementing the regrouping/merger/deletion of the trades the following will be strictly ensured:- (a) Merged Trades. Necessary Part II Order affecting the changed trade nomenclature be published as per format of Appx ‘J’ (revised- 1999) fwd vide this HQ letter No. A/20038/MP 8 (I of R) (a) dated 17 Nov 2008. OA No.98/2009 3 (b) Fixation of seniority. Please ensure that Inter-se-Seniority between these merged trade in the same Arms/Service is fixed as per Para 2(d) of this HQ Note No.B/10035/Rationalisation/MP-3(PBOR) dt 05 Jan 2009 ref. (c) Promotions. While calculating the new rank wise authorization of the vacancies for promotion in the respective trade, it will be ensured that promotions are issued as per correct ratio/percentage of the authorized strength. No surplus promotions will be issued in any circumstance. (d) Terms and conditions of Service. Terms and conditions of service will be as per existing trade/new trade as applicable. 2. Record offices will ensure that casualties regarding merging of trades as earmarked in Appx ‘A’ and re-designation of trades as mentioned in Appx ‘B’ to this HQ letter No.B/10035/Rationalisation/MP-3 (PBOR) dated 05 Jan 2009 are published immediately. 3. A completion report to this effect be fwd to this HQ by 30 Jun 2009. (PR Vijayan) Col Dir MP-8(I of R) For Adjutant General. Copy to:- MP-3 (PBOR) -For Info wrt your note mentioned at para 1 above please Army Software Development - A copy of this HQ Note No.B/10035/ Centre Signals Enclave Rationalisation/MP-3(PBOR) dt 05 Jan 09 Rao Tula Ram Marg with its enclosures is fwd herewith for New Delhi-1100 10 incorporating the merged/obsolete/ Redesinged trades in ARPAN through SISL. 3. As per this merger of the various grades and all the grades bearing on the subject were merged together. The principle of integrated seniority was laid down in para 2(d) of the Head Quarters order dated 05.01.2001 which clearly stipulates OA No.98/2009 4 that the date of seniority shall be the date of enrolment in respect of sepoy and same is reproduce as under:- ‘(d) Fixation of Seniority: Inter-se-fixing of seniority between merged trades in the same Arm/ Service will be done by taking the date of seniority as date of enrolment in respect of Sepoys. In respect of individuals who have received one or more promotion i.e. Naik upwards, the date of seniority will be taken as the date of promotion to the substantive rank is same then provisions of Record Office Instructions (ROI) will apply. This one time measure will be taken alongwith merger of trades and will be mentioned at the level of respective Records Offices.’ Therefore, the crucial date for integrated seniority of various trades was the date of enrolment as a sepoy. 4. There are various grades prior to 1981 like Engine Fitter, Machinist Engineer, Sapper Surveyor, Draughtsman Topo and Surveyor Topo etc. There were 47 grades and these were merged together and a uniform qualification was laid on 12.03.1982 i.e. 12th shreni (Science group) failing which 10th shreni for Engineers and 12th shreni group with English, Maths and Science failing which 10th shreni for Signals, the individuals qualifying Intermediate with Arts subject but Matric with Science, Maths and English or higher secondary pre-degree course/pre- university course with Science, English and Math. OA No.98/2009 5 But these academic qualifications were laid down way back in 1981 but the merger of these grades was done in 2009 on the recommendation of 6th Central Pay Commission. 5. Therefore, now in this background the grievance of the applicant that persons who are working as a Sapper Surveyor are sought to be given the higher benefits for promotion then the persons who are being serving as Draughtsman Topo or Surveyor Topo. Therefore, unequals cannot be made equal. The question before us is whether after merging of the grades their chances for promotion has been affected or whether unequal have been equated with equals or not. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant contented that persons of Draughtsman batch i.e. Sh.Kewal Singh onwards have been made junior to Surveyor. This cannot be examined in this petition because we do not have with us combine seniority list made by the respondents after integration of grades in terms clause 2(d) of the order dated 05.01.2009. OA No.98/2009 6 7. In case the applicant make out a case that the persons who are Sapper Surveyor junior to him have been placed higher in the seniority, he is free to challenge the same. If the seniority has been prepared as per para 2 (d) as quoted above then there cannot be grievance so far as the applicant is concerned. As the facts which have been brought before us the academic qualifications for various grades have been revised way back in the year 1981 and the recruitment has been made on that basis including that of petitioner. Since various grades merged together and number was reduced on the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission, therefore, list of persons of revised grades were finalised by the letters dated 05th June, 2009 and 30th January, 2009 and on that basis the common seniority should have been prepared. If a common seniority has been prepared with due regard to the aforesaid provisions then there should not be any grievance of the applicant. In case seniority has not been prepared in view of the norms laid down by the respondents then it will be open for the applicant to challenge in accordance with law. But so far as the policy decision is concerned there is no illegality. OA No.98/2009 7 8. Hence, we do not find any merit in the petition. Same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. A.K. MATHUR (Chairperson) M.L. NAIDU (Member) New Delhi July 28, 2010. .