Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Absorbed Employees Seeking Higher Grade Pay in Nagpur Municipal Corporation. Petitioners, originally Hydrant Mistry, were absorbed as Library Assistant and Tax Collector; their time-bound promotion grade pay of Rs.2400 was correctly fixed based on the promotional hierarchy of their new posts, not the original fire brigade post.

High Court: Bombay High Court
  • 536
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, four employees of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, were originally appointed as Hydrant Mistry in the Fire Brigade Department between August and November 2004. In 2015, the Corporation abolished the post of Hydrant Mistry and absorbed the petitioners into other departments: petitioner No.1 as Library Assistant and petitioners No.2 to 4 as Tax Collectors, with the same pay scale of Rs.5200-20200 with grade pay of Rs.1900. Subsequently, the Corporation granted them time-bound promotion under a 2011 circular, fixing their grade pay at Rs.2400 instead of the Rs.2800 they claimed. The petitioners argued that their next promotional post in the fire brigade would have been Senior Leading Fireman with grade pay of Rs.2800, and therefore they should receive that grade pay. The Corporation countered that after absorption, the petitioners' promotional hierarchy is based on their new posts: Library Assistant's next promotion is Assistant Librarian (grade pay Rs.2400) and Tax Collector's next promotion is Junior Tax Collector (grade pay Rs.2400). The court framed the issue as whether the petitioners were entitled to grade pay of Rs.2800. The court noted that the petitioners did not challenge the absorption resolution or order. Relying on the Establishment Schedule, the court found that the next promotional posts for Library Assistant and Tax Collector carried grade pay of Rs.2400. The court held that after absorption, the petitioners' entitlement to grade pay must be determined with reference to the promotional hierarchy of the post in which they were absorbed, not the original post. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, finding no error in the Corporation's decision to grant grade pay of Rs.2400.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Time-Bound Promotion - Absorption - Grade Pay Fixation - Petitioners, originally Hydrant Mistry in Fire Brigade, were absorbed as Library Assistant and Tax Collector after abolition of their post - They claimed grade pay of Rs.2800/- (next higher for Senior Leading Fireman) but were granted Rs.2400/- based on promotional hierarchy of their new posts - Held that after absorption, petitioners are entitled to grade pay as per the promotional ladder of the post in which they were absorbed, not the original post (Paras 7-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of first-time-bound promotion on the next higher pay scale with grade pay of Rs.2800/- instead of Rs.2400/- as granted by the Corporation?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Time-bound promotion
  • absorption
  • equivalent pay scale
  • grade pay fixation
  • promotional hierarchy
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (03) 191

Writ Petition No.5274 of 2021

2025-03-01

Avinash G. Gharote, Abhay J. Mantri

2025:BHC-NAG:2343-DB

Mr. S.S. Sanyal for petitioners, Mr. J.B. Kasat for respondents

Shri Vijay s/o Shalikram Khobragade, Shri Ranjit s/o Madhaorao Kamble, Shri Devendra s/o Dayaram Tekade, Shri Kisan s/o Fagoji Barai

The Nagpur Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner, Superintendent Library Department, and Assessor Tax Department

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging fixation of pay scale with grade pay of Rs.2400 instead of Rs.2800 upon time-bound promotion after absorption.

Remedy Sought

Direction to respondent No.1 to fix petitioners' pay scale with grade pay of Rs.2800.

Filing Reason

Petitioners were granted grade pay of Rs.2400 upon time-bound promotion instead of Rs.2800, which they claimed based on their original post of Hydrant Mistry.

Previous Decisions

Resolution No.97 dated 18-05-2015 abolished post of Hydrant Mistry; order dated 14-12-2016 absorbed petitioners into Library and Tax Departments; order dated 04-12-2018 granted time-bound promotion with grade pay of Rs.2400.

Issues

Whether the petitioners are entitled to grade pay of Rs.2800 instead of Rs.2400 upon time-bound promotion after absorption?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that their next promotional post as Hydrant Mistry was Senior Leading Fireman with grade pay of Rs.2800, and they should receive that grade pay. Respondents argued that after absorption, the promotional hierarchy is based on the new posts (Library Assistant and Tax Collector), whose next promotions carry grade pay of Rs.2400.

Ratio Decidendi

After absorption into a new post, an employee's entitlement to grade pay upon time-bound promotion is determined by the promotional hierarchy of the post in which they are absorbed, not the original post. The petitioners did not challenge the absorption and are bound by the pay structure of their new posts.

Judgment Excerpts

The short point that arises for our consideration is- 'Whether the petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of first-time-bound promotion on the next higher pay scale with grade pay of Rs.2800/- instead of Rs.2400/- as granted by the Corporation?' It is undisputed that the petitioners were appointed between 24-08-2004 and 02-11-2004 on the post of 'Hydrant Mistry.' The petitioners have neither challenged nor disputed Resolution No.97 dated 18.05.2015 and the absorption order dated 14-12-2016, which itself denotes that they have no grievances about them.

Procedural History

Petitioners filed Writ Petition No.5274 of 2021 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the fixation of grade pay at Rs.2400. The petition was heard and finally disposed of on the date of judgment.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal Against Rejection of Application to Set Aside Ex-Parte Award in Motor Accident Claim. Order 9 Rule 13 CPC Not Applicable to Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Under Section 169 of Motor Vehicles Act...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Tenant's Appeal in Transfer of Property Act Dispute Over Manufacturing Lease. Court Holds That Month's Notice Terminating Tenancy Was Valid as Tenant Failed to Prove Dominant Purpose Was Manufacturing Under Section 106 of Tran...