Judgment : R. Banumathi, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.1537 of 2012, dismissing the Application filed by the petitioner and declining to grant the pay band of Rs.5200-20200 with grade pay of Rs.2400/- to the petitioner, this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. The petitioner A.Ramanikumar was initially appointed as T.S.Cleaner (Group D) with effect from 12.10.1987, then appointed as Caretaker (Group C) with effect from 25.3.1998 by an order dated 24.3.1998 and his appointment as Caretaker was in the pay scale of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590. Following the implementation of the VI Pay Commission, the petitioner's pay was fixed from 01.01.2006 in the Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/-, which is corresponding to the said pay scale of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590. 3. The petitioner has also completed twenty years of service, for which he was granted MACP-II with Grade pay of Rs.2000/- with effect from 1.9.2008. The petitioner submitted representation dated 16.2.2010, requesting to give him the Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.2400/- with effect from 1.1.2006, on the ground that the floor area and compound area is 1,38,080 sq.ft. 4. According to the Department, norms have been subsequently fixed for determining the level of post of Caretaker vide Dept. of Expenditure's O.M. No.7(46)/E.III (A)/98 dated 30.6.1999, the petitioner is eligible to draw only the pay scale of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590 for an area between 2001 sq.mtrs to 7000 sq.mts. and as the total floor area of the building of the petitioner is only 4948 sq.mts. as per records and the corresponding Pay Band and Grade Pay in the revised pay structure is already given in PB I – 5200 – 20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/-, the same was intimated to the petitioner by a letter dated 13.12.2010. Challenging the said communication dated 13.12.2010, passed by the second respondent and to direct the respondents to fix the Grade Pay at Rs.2400/- instead of Rs.1,900/- in the pay scale of Rs.5200 – 20200 with effect from 1.1.2006 and also to pay him arrears with interest, the petitioner filed the Original Application before the Tribunal. 5. Challenging the said communication dated 13.12.2010, passed by the second respondent and to direct the respondents to fix the Grade Pay at Rs.2400/- instead of Rs.1,900/- in the pay scale of Rs.5200 – 20200 with effect from 1.1.2006 and also to pay him arrears with interest, the petitioner filed the Original Application before the Tribunal. 5. The respondents resisted the claim of the Petitioner by contending that the plinth area available is only 4948 sqmtr which is falling between 2001 sq.mts to 7000 sq.mts, for which the petitioner is eligible to draw only the pay scale of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590, for which the Pay Band in the VI Pay Commission is Rs.5200 – 20200, with Grade Pay of Rs.1,900/- and therefore the petitioner claim the Grade Pay of Rs.2,400/- instead of Rs.1,900/-, cannot be sustained. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions, the Tribunal held that as per the records produced by the respondents, it is categorically stated that the floor area of the building was only 53,262.75.sqft. i.e 4948 sq.mtrs and therefore the respondents have rightly fixed the scale of pay of the petitioner in the Pay Band of Rs.5200 – 20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1,900/-, as per the VI Pay Commission Recommendation and on those findings, the Original Application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Challenging the order of the Tribunal dismissing the Original Application, the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Mr.Malaichamy, submitted that the floor area along with compound area was 1,15,289.5.sq.ft and hence the petitioner is eligible to claim the Pay Band based on the floor area and also the compound area and therefore, the respondents are not justified in fixing the Pay Band only based on the floor area of the building. 8. The learned counsel has drawn our attention to the recommendation made by the Senior Manager, Mail Motor Service in No.MSE/B9-23/II dated 05.10.1996 and submitted that in the said recommendation, it is clearly stated that floor area is 50,692 sqft and the compound area is 87,388 sq.ft., put together, the area available is 1,38,050 sqft and therefore the petitioner is eligible to Pay Band of Rs.5200 – 20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1,900/-. 9. We have heard Mrs.R.Meenakshi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 10. 9. We have heard Mrs.R.Meenakshi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 10. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the floor area of the building is only 50,692 sq.ft., and in the proceedings of the Senior Manager made MSE/B9-23/II dated 05.10.1996 , it is stated that the total area (i.e.) floor area and compound area to be taken as 1.38.080 sq.ft., however, the said communication of the Senior Manager is purely recommendatory. It is pertinent to note that in the order of appointment of the petitioner dated 24.3.1998, the petitioner was appointed as Caretaker in the pay scale of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590, the petitioner has accepted the order of appointment of Caretaker in the said scale of pay without any protest and had worked in the said position for nearly twenty years. Further, as per the norms laid down for determining the level of the post vide Department of Expenditure's O.M.No.7(46)/E.III (A) dated 30.6.1999 and pursuant to the recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission, for the floor area of the building above 2000 sq.mts and upto 7000 sq.mts, the scale of pay of the Caretaker is only Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590 and for the said scale pay, the corresponding pay in VI Pay Commission is Rs.5200 – 20200 along with Grade Pay of Rs.1,900/-. Since the floor area of the building is only 4948 sq.mts i.e.53,262.75 sq.ft. it falls within the category of the aforesaid norms laid down for determining the level of post of Caretaker. 11. Based on the plinth area of the building i.e. 4948 sq.mts, the respondents have rightly fixed the Pay Band of the petitioner as per the norms laid down for determining the level of post of Caretaker and since the findings of the Tribunal is also based on materials placed on record, we do not find any infirmity warranting interference with the order passed by the Tribunal. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.