Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 8 (PNJ)

S. P. Kansal v. Union Of India

2009-01-06

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, T.S.THAKUR

body2009
Judgment Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. 1. The petitioner who retired as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner from Chandigarh has assailed impugned order Annexure P-5 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as, `the Tribunal) and also Annexure P-7 whereby prayer for review was also dismissed. 2. The petitioner, who was posted as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner in the scale of Rs. 7880-11660/-, claims that under Assured Career Progression Scheme he is entitled to pay scale (Rs. 10025-15100/-) meant for higher post i.e., Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner instead of next higher pay scale of Rs. 9200-13900/- available to the Government Servants. 3. This submission of the petitioner, who has appeared in person, has raised the question whether under Assured Career Progression Scheme an employee is entitled to the scale of higher post available in the cadre or the immediate higher scale prescribed by the Pay Commission for Government servants. 4. Government of Punjab formulated `Assured Career Progression Scheme (hereinafter to be referred as `ACP Scheme). This Scheme envisages that any employee of the State, who for some or the other reason is not able to get promotion within a span of eight or sixteen years, will be granted next higher scale than the one in which he was posted, provided his service record is free from any blemish during the prescribed period. The object of the Scheme was to give incentive to the employee to perform his duties with utmost dedication and not to feel frustrated due to stagnation or lack of promotional avenues in career growth. 5. This Scheme was also adopted by the Union Territory of Chandigarh. 6. Admittedly, petitioner, who was posted as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner for the period of more than eight years, could not be promoted as Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner as there was no such post existing in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. However this promotional avenue was available in the State of Punjab, whose rules, pay-scales and recommendations of pay commission are followed by the Union Territory of Chandigarh. 7. To appreciate the arguments raised in the writ petition and the view taken by the authorities and affirmed by the Tribunal, it will be necessary to notice facts of the case. The petitioner joined services of Union Territory of Chandigarh on 2.1.1967. 7. To appreciate the arguments raised in the writ petition and the view taken by the authorities and affirmed by the Tribunal, it will be necessary to notice facts of the case. The petitioner joined services of Union Territory of Chandigarh on 2.1.1967. He was promoted as Excise and Taxation Officer (hereinafter to be referred as, `ETO) on 19.1.1983. He was further promoted by Chandigarh Administration on 28.11.1988 as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner (hereinafter to be referred as, `AETC). The services of the petitioner were regularised on 16.6.1995. Petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired on 30.11.2006. The petitioner, on his promotion as AETC was placed in the scale of Rs. 7880-11660/-. On 25.9.1998, Government of Punjab on the recommendations of 4th Punjab Pay Commission decided to implement the ACP Scheme. The ACP Scheme was made effective with effect from 1.1.1996. As per the ACP Scheme, an employee who had rendered service of more than 8 years on a post in the cadre and is not promoted to the next higher level on account of non availability of vacancy at such higher level or non-existence of a promotional level in the cadre, was to be granted pay scale which is next higher in the hierarchy of pay scales given in Column No. 3 of the First Schedule annexed to the 1998 Rules. However, to be precise, it would be necessary to notice Clause 2(i) of Annexure A-6 to Annexure P-1 at page 46 of the paper-book which reads as under :- "i) After a service of 8 years in a post or posts in the same "Cadre" (hereinafter referred to as the same post) an employee, who is not promoted to the next higher level on account of non-availability of vacancy at such higher level or non-existence of a promotional level in the "Cadre" shall be granted the pay scales which is next higher in the hierarchy of pay scales given in Column No. 3 of the `First Schedule annexed to Rules, 1998. If on 1-1-1996 or the date opted under Rule 6 of Rules, 1998 an employee becomes entitled to a higher pay scale on account of protection under the said Rules he shall be granted such higher pay scale." 8. The Chandigarh Administration has adopted ACP Scheme and the pay scales as available to the counter parts of the petitioner in the State of Punjab. 9. The Chandigarh Administration has adopted ACP Scheme and the pay scales as available to the counter parts of the petitioner in the State of Punjab. 9. Case of the petitioner not denied by the respondents is that the petitioner was given proficiency step up. The Government of Punjab after the recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission, adopted a general conversion table wherein the existing pay scales were to be converted to proposed revised pay scales. 10. From the ladder of pay scales, a small table of pay scales with remarks added by us, relevant for the purpose of this writ petition, can be culled as under :- Sr. No. Existing Pay-Scale Proposed revised Pay-Scale Remarks 1 to 17. xx xx xx 18. 2410-4000 7880-11660 Scale in which petitioner was placed 19. 2850-4375 9200-13900 Scale in which petitioner was placed as AETC under ACP Scheme 20. 3000-4375 9750-14700 21. 3000-4500 & 3000-5000 10025-15100 Scale sought by petitioner, granted to DETC in Punjab 11 The petitioner before us and the Tribunal has pleaded that he is entitled to scale of Rs. 10025-15100/- as this is the scale which is granted to DETCs, being the next promotional avenue in the cadre and the hierarchy. It is not in dispute that in the State of Punjab, scale of Rs. 10025-15100/- is the scale which is granted to DETC after promotion from AETC. 12. We are not inclined to accept the submissions made in this case. The argument that in case no promotion is granted to an employee, who has rendered more than eight years service, then he should be granted the scale, which is available for the post, to which the employee is entitled to be promoted (that being the only scale available in the cadre), if is accepted then the employee will ipso-facto get all financial benefits of promotion, on grant of scale. This, in itself, will not achieve the object of ACP Scheme. Therefore, the scale in between the post to which the employee was to be promoted and the existing post, is to be granted so that some succor is provided to the employee. This, in itself, will not achieve the object of ACP Scheme. Therefore, the scale in between the post to which the employee was to be promoted and the existing post, is to be granted so that some succor is provided to the employee. Otherwise also, if we examine the scheme, the contention of the petitioner that in the hierarchy of pay scales, he is to be given the scale which is next scale in the cadre after promotion but not the scale in the hierarchy of pay scales is not tenable. We are unable to accept this argument as Clause 5(b) of the ACP Scheme specifically state that he is to be placed in the higher scale. This was the stand of the respondents before the Tribunal when in their written statement, they had written as under :- "1. That Sh. S.P. Kansal after completion of 8 years service on 15.6.2003 as Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner was given the pay scale of Rs. 9200-13900/-, which is the next higher pay scale in the hierarchy of the pay scales mentioned in the Schedules annexed to the aforesaid Pay Rules of 1998." The Tribunal had rightly concluded as under :- "5. It is an admitted fact that there is no post of Dy. Excise and Taxation Officer in U.T., Chandigarh. The applicant who was in the scale of Rs. 7880-11660/- w.e.f. 16.6.95 has rightly been given the hierarchical scale of Rs. 9200-13900/- on completion of 8 years of service on 15.6.2003 and he is not entitled to the scale of Rs. 10025-15100/- for want of post of DETC in U.T. Chandigarh. Accordingly the OA has no merit and is dismissed as such." 13. A perusal of the ACP Scheme make it evident that the stand of the respondent-employer has been rightly upheld by the Tribunal. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal which is appropriate, just and in accordance with law and facts of the case. As the result of our discussion held above, the present writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.