ORDER 1. The only question which falls for consideration in this appeal is about fixation of pay of the respondents in the revised pay scale under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). 2. The respondents were appointed as Staff Artistes in Doordarshan Kendra at Calcutta in September/October 1974. At the time of their appointment they were placed in the scale of Rs 500-800. By notification dated 8-3-1977, the revised pay scales under the Rules were made applicable to the Staff Artistes in Doordarshan with effect from 1-1-1973. Under the Rules the scale of Rs 500-800 was revised to Rs 650-1200. At the time of their appointment in 1974 the respondents were being paid Rs 733 per month (basic pay of Rs 500 plus Rs 163 as DAIDP and Rs 70 as interim relief). fee/pay in the revised scale of Rs 650-1200 in 1974 was fixed at Rs 650 and the sum of Rs 83 was treated as personal pay to be adjusted against future increases. The grievance of the respondents is that their basic a pay in 1974 should have been fixed at Rs 775 in accordance with Rule 7 of the Rules. They, therefore, approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") by the petition (OA No. 99 of 1987). The said petition has been allowed by the Tribunal by the impugned judgment dated 6-11 - 1987. The Tribunal has directed the appellants to revise and fix the fee/pay scale of the respondents on the analogy of Third Pay Commissions recommendations from their respective date of appointment as per the Rules. 3. Shri K. Lahiri, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, has urged that the Tribunal has failed to take note of the notification dated 1-6-1974 issued by the Government of India which was applicable in the present case. The said notification deals with fixation of pay of persons appointed/promoted after 1-1-1973 and it provides as follows : "The revised scales of pay introduced under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1973, take effect from 1st January, 1973. The said notification deals with fixation of pay of persons appointed/promoted after 1-1-1973 and it provides as follows : "The revised scales of pay introduced under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1973, take effect from 1st January, 1973. Under the proviso to Rule 5 of these Rules, a government servant has the option to retain the existing scale, i.e., the scale of the post held by him on 1st January, 1973 until the date on which he earns his next or any subsequent increment in that scale, or until he vacates that post, or ceases to draw pay in that scale. This option is not available to persons appointed to a post after 1st January, 1973 whether for the first time in government service, or by transfer or promotion from another post and they are necessarily to be allowed pay in the pre-revised scales. On issue of the notification, however, their pay would be fixed in the revised pay scale of the post with effect from the date of such appointment. In some of these cases the fixation of pay in the revised pay scale of the post with effect from the date of such revised scales may involve drop in emoluments. Drop in emoluments may also occur in the case of some persons who were promoted after 1st January, 1973, but before the date of the issue of the relevant notification revising the scales, to the higher of the two grades which have been merged and a single revised scale prescribed for both. As the revised scales take effect from 1st January, 1973, and the higher grade will have ceased to exist on and from that date, such promotions become non-effective. The question as to the extent of protection that may be allowed in such cases has been examined and it is considered that it is not correct in principle to allow a person any option to retain the pre-revised scale of pay in respect of a post to which he was not actually appointed on or before 1st January, 1973, or which ceased to exist after that date. Accordingly, all persons recruited after 1st January, 1973, or appointed by transfer or promotion to posts after that date, should be allowed pay only in the revised scales as admissible under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1973. 2. Accordingly, all persons recruited after 1st January, 1973, or appointed by transfer or promotion to posts after that date, should be allowed pay only in the revised scales as admissible under the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1973. 2. However, to mitigate the adverse effect of the retrospective application of the rules resulting in drop in emoluments in the type of cases referred to in paragraph 1 above, the President is pleased to decide a as follows : (i) Where a single existing scale has been replaced by the single revised scale, the difference between the existing emoluments (i.e., the basic pay, dearness pay, dearness allowance, and interim reliefs at the rate in force on 31-12-1972, and special pay where admissible, actually drawn or that would have been drawn in the pre-revised scales as on the date of the notification revising the scale of the higher post, and the emoluments in the revised scale, i.e., pay in the revised scale of that post, and special pay thereon, if any, may be allowed as personal pay to be absorbed in future increases in pay." 4. Shri Arun Prakash Chatterjee, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, has, however, placed reliance on Rule 7 of the Rules and has submitted that the fee/pay of the respondents in the revised pay scale should have been fixed in accordance with clause (A) (a) of sub-rule (1) of the said rule. The relevant provisions contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 are as under : "Fixation of initial pay in the revised scales. The relevant provisions contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 are as under : "Fixation of initial pay in the revised scales. -(1) The initial pay of a government servant who elects, or is deemed to have elected under sub-rule (3) of Rule 6, to be governed by the revised scale from the 1St day of January, 1973, shall, unless in any case the President by special order otherwise directs, be fixed separately in respect of his substantive pay in the permanent post on which he holds a lien or would have held a lien if it had not been suspended, and in respect of his pay in the officiating post held by him, in the following manner, namely : (A) in the case of a government servant drawing basic pay up to and including Rs 1800 in the existing scale- (a) an amount representing five per cent of the basic pay, subject to a minimum of Rs 15 and a maximum of Rs 50, shall be added to the existing emoluments of the government servant;" 5. In our opinion, the said contention of Shri Chatterjee cannot be accepted for the reason that sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 makes provisions for cases where the government servant either elects or is deemed to have elected under sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 to be governed by the revised scale from 1-1-1973. In other words, sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 is applicable only in those cases where a person was in service prior to 1-1-1973 because only then he would have the right to elect to be governed by the revised scale under the Rules. The respondents were appointed after 1-1-1973. They cannot avail of the protection conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 7. Their case is to be governed by the notification dated 1-6-1974 whereby certain protection in pay has been given in cases where the pay the government servant was getting was higher than the pay fixed under the revised scales by permitting him to draw the emoluments which he was drawing under the earlier scale and treating the amount in excess of the pay fixed in the revised scale as his personal pay to be absorbed in future increases in pay. This was done in the present case. This was done in the present case. It appears that the notification dated 1-6-1974 was not brought a to the notice of the Tribunal because there is no reference to it in the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. 6. Shri Chatterjee has referred to paragraph 9 of the affidavit in opposition of Shri Saul Kumar Gupta filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that T. V. Producers Grade II who were appointed before 1-1-1974 and were initially given the scale of Rs 500-800 were upgraded to Rs 700-1300 which scale has been subsequently raised to Rs 900-1400. It is submitted that those who were appointed after 1-1-1973, like the respondents, have been treated discriminatively and they have been given the lower scale of Rs 650- 1200 and that there is no justification for this differential treatment. This submission has been raised for the first time in this Court. It was not raised before the Tribunal. The contention involving questions of fact cannot be permitted to be raised for the first time in the appeal. We do not propose to deal with it and leave the respondents to raise it, if they are so advised, in suitable proceedings before an appropriate forum. 7. The appeal is allowed, the impugned judgment of the Tribunal dated 6-11-1987 is set aside and OA No. 99 of 1987 filed by the respondents is dismissed. By order dated 20-7-1988 the appellants were required to pay Rs 2500 towards the cost of the respondents irrespective of the result of the appeal. The respondents will be entitled to payment of the said amount as costs.