Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Anil D. Kagathara and another, were initially engaged as casual labourers with the respondent department and were later regularized. They filed Original Application No.119 of 2021 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, seeking pay fixation by protecting the last pay drawn immediately before regularization, as well as seniority and other benefits from the date of initial engagement. The Tribunal partly allowed the application, directing the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioners afresh after taking into account the last pay drawn by them immediately before the date of their regularization, so as to protect their last pay drawn. However, the Tribunal declined the other benefits such as seniority. Aggrieved by the denial of seniority and other benefits, the petitioners filed two separate Special Civil Applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court. The High Court heard both petitions together as they arose from the same impugned order. The petitioners argued that they were entitled to pay protection and seniority from the date of initial engagement, relying on various rules and precedents. The respondents opposed the petitions, contending that the Tribunal's order was just and proper. The High Court, after considering the submissions and the material on record, held that the Tribunal had correctly directed pay fixation with protection of last pay drawn, and found no error in the denial of seniority and other benefits. Consequently, the High Court dismissed both petitions, upholding the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pay Fixation on Regularization - Protection of Last Pay Drawn - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, Fundamental Rules - The petitioners, initially engaged as casual labourers and later regularized, sought pay fixation by protecting the last pay drawn immediately before regularization. The Tribunal directed the respondents to fix pay afresh taking into account the last pay drawn, but denied seniority and other benefits. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order regarding pay protection, finding no error in the direction to fix pay afresh with protection of last pay drawn, and dismissed the petitions. (Paras 1-20) B) Service Law - Seniority on Regularization - Denial of Benefits - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 - The petitioners also claimed seniority and other benefits from the date of initial engagement. The Tribunal declined such benefits. The High Court did not interfere with that part of the order, as the petitioners failed to establish any legal right to seniority from the date of initial engagement. (Paras 3-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to pay protection on regularization by fixing their pay at the stage of last pay drawn immediately before regularization, and whether the Tribunal erred in denying seniority and other benefits.
Final Decision
Both Special Civil Applications are dismissed. The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 06.08.2021 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Pay protection on regularization
- last pay drawn
- Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules
- 2016
- Fundamental Rules
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
