LexYOGENDRA NARAYAN CHOWDHURY AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
'r ~· YOGENDRA NARAYAN CHOWDHURY AND ORS. A v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. NOVEMBER 30, 1995 [K. RAMASWAMY AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.] B Se1Vice Law : Military E11gi11eeri11g Se1Vic<>-Mazdoors-Classiftcatio11 011 the basis of Ill Pay Commission Reporl-Vnskilled-Semi Skilled-Skilled a11d Highly C skil/ed-Mazdoors-l'assi11g of test by-Fitme11t i11to skilled categ01y-Rever- sio11 to semi skilled category a feeder post to skilled category-Held valid. Constitution of India, 1950: Arlicle 136-Special leave Petition-Dismissal in limine-ffeld does D not operate as res judicata. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission the Mazdoors working in the military engineering department were classified into four categories viz: (i) unskilled; (ii) semi skilled (iii) skilled and (iv) E highly skilled. The pay scales for these categories respectively were (i) Rs. 196-232; (ii) Rs. 200-290; (iii) Rs. 260-400 and (iv) Rs. 330-480. Some of the Chowkidars and Mazdoors who passed the test were initially classified into skilled category and were given fitment in that scale. Later they were reverted to semi skilled category and given fitment accordingly. Directions were also issued to recover the arrears paid to them. These orders were F challenged before different Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Cuttack Bench upheld the reversion to semi skilled category but directed not to recover the arrears. On the other hand a Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal held that the reversion was bad and conseqnently directed restoration of their category into the skilled category. On appeal G decision of Calcutta Bench was dismissed i11 limine by this Court. In the meanwhile another Bench of Calcutta Tribunal followed the view taken by Cuttack Bench and upheld the reversion but set aside the order of recovery of arrears. Hence. these appeals. Dismissing the appeals, this Court 17 H 18 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. A HELD : 1. These cases do not warrant interference. It is not in B c D dispute that semi-skilled is a feeder post for the skilled category. After passing the test, Mazdoors are necessarily to be fitted first into semi· skilled category so that after putting required length of service and other considerations, they would become eligible for promotion into skilled grade. Obviously, realising this mistake they were later correctly given fitment into the category of semi-skilled and the appropriate scale of pay was assigned. It is not a case of reversion but one of proper fitment. Under these circumstances, the view of the first Bench of the Calcutta CAT is clearly erroneous in law and the view of the latter Bench of the Calcutta and of the Cuttack Bench are correct. [19-G-H, 20-A·C] 2. The dismissal of Special Leave Petition in limine without assigning reasons does not operate as res judicata. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9312 of 1995 Etc. From the Judgment and Order dated 13.2.91 of the Central Ad- ministrative Tribunal, Calcutta, in O.A. No. 946 of 1987. A.S. Nambiar and Mrs. Sarla Chandra for the Appellants. E K.N. Shukla, S.D. Sharma and Mrs. Anil Katiyar for the Respon- dent" The following Order of the Court was delivered : In these appeals the only question is whether the appellants-motor F pump attendants - are semi-skilled or skilled workers as determined in the Government circular dated May 11, 1983. After the III Pay Commission, mazdoors working in the military engineering have been classified as unskilled and their scale of pay is Rs. 196-232, semi-skilled Rs. 200 to 290; skilled Rs. 260 to 400 and highly skilled grade II Rs. 330-480, highly skilled grade I Rs. 380-560. As a consequence of fitment, all the unskilled maz- G doors, chowkidars who passed the test, were initially classified into skilled category and later it was discovered that it was a wrong classification. Consequently, directions were issued to fit them in the semi-skilled category and direction to recover the arrears paid during the period of 1984 to 1986 was also given. Some of the persons came to challenge these H orders before different Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal. In • Y.N. CHOWDHURY v. U.0.1. 19 the Cuttack Bench, the same categories of persons filed 0 .A. 382/87. The A Tribunal held that they being unskilled are to be classified as semi-skilled since they had passed the test and the semi-skilled is a feeder post to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.