Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, the Director of National Institute of Virology and others, challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal which directed stepping up/antedating of the increment of the respondent, Dr. Ashok K. Gupta, at the time of re-fixation of pay. The respondent was promoted as Assistant Director on 1/7/93, while his juniors Dr. Gore and Dr. Mourya were promoted on 3/2/94 and 28/2/95 respectively. The respondent was permitted to undergo a foreign assignment from 11.10.92 to 10.10.97 but returned and resumed duty on 11.1.98, overstaying by about 100 days, which was regularized by ex-post facto sanction. Pay scales were revised on 1.1.96. Dr. Gore and Dr. Mourya were to get their next increment on 1.2.96, but the respondent's next increment was fixed on 1.7.96. The respondent challenged this before the Central Administrative Tribunal, seeking stepping up of pay so that he would also get increment on 1.2.96. The Tribunal allowed the application. The High Court, in the writ petition, held that the overstay period was not relevant for fixing the date of increment and that the Tribunal had based its order on irrelevant considerations. The High Court quashed the Tribunal's order and allowed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pay Fixation - Stepping Up of Increment - The respondent, promoted as Assistant Director on 1/7/93, was permitted foreign assignment from 11.10.92 to 10.10.97 but overstayed by about 100 days, regularized ex-post facto. His juniors Dr. Gore and Dr. Mourya were promoted later but got increment on 1.2.96, while respondent's increment was fixed on 1.7.96. The Central Administrative Tribunal directed stepping up of increment to 1.2.96. The High Court held that the overstay period was not relevant for fixing the date of increment; the Tribunal's order was based on irrelevant considerations and was quashed. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal was correct in directing stepping up/antedating of increment of the respondent at the time of re-fixation of pay, despite the respondent having overstayed his foreign assignment.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Law Points
- Stepping up of pay
- increment date
- pay fixation
- overstay period
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- writ petition
