केन्द्रीय सचिवालय राजभाषा सेवा समूह
'क'
अधिकारी
एसोसिएशन
CENTRAL
SECRETARIATE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE SERVICE GROUP 'A' OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
BRIEF FACTS AND UPDATION ABOUT 1986 CASE
The
Fourth Central Pay Commission, in respect of Junior and Senior Translators of
Central Secretariat Official Language Service, had recommended in Para 10.280
of their report that “It has been suggested by the members of the service
that Junior Translators should be given a higher pay scale than Assistants of
CSS as they are required to possess Master Degree whereas the Assistants
possess Bachelor Degree.---- In view of higher qualification required for
entry grade of Junior Translator, we recommend that the post be given the pay
scale of Rs.1400-2600 and for the post of Senior Translator, we recommend the
pay scale of Rs.1640-2900.”
2. After the one and same pay
scale of Rs.1400-2600 was given to Junior Translators & Assistants and one step higher pay scale of
Rs. 1640-2900/- was given to Sr. Translators w.e.f. 01.01.1986 by the IVth CPC
and the parity so recommended between the posts of Junior Translator and Assistant by the IVth CPC was accepted by the
Govt. vide CCS(RP) Rules 1986, the above said parity between the posts of Junior
Translator and Assistant was again
disturbed consequent upon issue of O.M. dated
31.07.1990 by the Department of Personnel & Training vide
which the pay scales of Assistants and Stenographers grade ‘C’ of CSS and CSSS were
raised from Rs. 1400-2600 to Rs. 1640-2900/-retrospectively w.e.f.01.01.1986
and accordingly the pay scale of
translators were not revised to higher side.
3. The
Translators also demanded similar higher revision of pay scales on the lines of
the above said Department of Personnel
& Training OM on the basis of parity given to Jr. Translators with
Assistants by the IVth CPC in view of their higher qualification of Master
Degree. After some petitions, the matter came up for hearing before the Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi who vide their order dated 14.05.2002
in CWP No. 7231/2001 directed to consider the case afresh on
merits. The operative part of the High Court’s said order is as follows :
“The
learned Tribunal did not issue any positive directions in this regard. We are, therefore, of the opinion that in
view of the facts and particularly having regard to the question involved in
the O.A. filed by the petitioner direction to consider the aforesaid question
should have been given by the learned Tribunal.
Having
regard to the contention raised by the petitioner in the writ petition, the
same may be considered to be a representation made on their part and the
respondent should consider the same on merits at
an early date.”
4. On
the basis of the aforesaid High Court order, the administrative
departmennt i. e. Deptt. of OL, after considering the case on
merits in terms of entry qualification, mode of recruitment and nature of
duties etc., had sent a proposal to the Ministry of Finance for granting higher
pay scales of Rs. 1640-2900, Rs. 2000-3500 and Rs. 2200-4000 to Junior
Translators, Senior Translators and Assistant Directors respectively
maintaining parity of pay scales granted by the Fourth Central Pay Commission
between the posts of Assistant/ Stenographer grade ‘C’ of CSS/CSSS and Jr.
Translator of CSOLS w. e. f. 01.01.1986. In response, the Department of
Expenditure, had initially approved grant of
upgraded pay scales
to Junior Translators, Senior Translators and Assistant Directors w. e. f.
11. 02. 2003 and subsequently revised it to be given
retrospective effect w.e.f. 01.01.1996 on notional basis with actual payments
from 11.02.2003 though not w.e.f. 01.01.1986.
5. After upgradation of pay scales of Junior Translators, Senior
Translators and Assistant Directors w.e.f. 01.01.1996 on notional basis, the
Department of Expenditure was again requested to upgrade the scales
retrospectively from 01.01.86, the date from which anomaly had occurred, in
order to comply with the directions of the High Court. This time, the
Department of Expenditure sought a legal advice also from the Department of
Legal Affairs, Ministry of
Law on the
issue that whether the action taken for upgradation of pay scales from
01.01.1996 was substantial
compliance of the Hon’ble
High Court order or not and the Department of Legal Affairs, inter alia,
had observed that the prayer of the petitioners in the writ petition does
not appear to have been dealt with-- . The Department, therefore, have to pass
appropriate order with regard to prayer that the pay scales should be upgraded
from 01.01.1986. The Department of Expenditure , however, did
not comply with
the said legal advice and
consequently the service members again approached the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi who vide their order dated 07.04.2008 advised /ordered us to file an independent OA in the Hon'ble CAT. We followed their instructions and the Hon’ble CAT vide their order dated 25.05.2010 in OA No. 331/2009 directed to consider the
claim of upgradation of the pay scales notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1986 within a
period of three months from the date of their order i.e. from 25.05.2010. The
highlights of the Tribunal Order alongwith its operative part are reproduced
below:-
“ (i)-----respondents were supposed
to examine the
question of granting
higher pay scales of
Rs. 1640-2900, Rs. 2000-3500 and Rs. 2200-4000 to the applicants i.e.
Jr. Translators, Sr. Translators and Asstt.Directors in CSOLS, maintaining
parity of pay scales between the posts of Assistants/Steno Grade ‘C’ of
CSS/CSSS and Junior Translators of CSOLS w.e.f. 01.01.1986.’’ (Para-3).
(ii)-----there is an error in
considering the case of the applicants from 01.01.1996 and not from 01.01.1986,
is not in dispute. Surely such are the notings made by none other than the
respondents themselves in the relevant
files. (Para-4).
(iii)---Once the respondents have complied
with the directions given by the High Court of Delhi and an order in that
regard has even been passed, the respondents can not take the plea that present
Original Application would be barred by the principles of res judicata.
On merits, in so far as non-consideration of the case of Applicants Association
for upgradation of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1986 is concerned, the same is not
in dispute. There indeed has been a mistake on the part of the respondents to
consider the case of the Applicants Association only w.e.f. 01.01.1996.’’
(Para-9).
(iv)
In view of the observations made above, we dispose of this Original Application
directing the respondents to consider the claim of the applicant association
for upgradation of their pay scales at par Assistants/Stenographers of CSS/CSSS)
w.e.f. 01.01.1986 at least on notional basis. Let the exercise, as ordained above, be completed within a period
of three months from today. There shall be no order as to the costs.”
(Para-10-Operative Part)."
6.
On the basis of the above said judgment, the Department of OL considered the
claim of the service members using its jurisdiction as administrative
department and reiterated its earlier proposal for upgrading the pay scales of
Junior Translators, Senior Translators and Assistant Directors w.e.f.
01.01.1986 presuming that being this a case of notional upgradation only, the
Deptt. of Expenditure also would approve the proposal in exercise of their jurisdiction
to view the case from financial angle. It is also noteworthy that the qualification
required for entry grade of Junior Translator is again higher since 2006 i.e.
Post Graduate Degree with 02 years experience/Diploma/Certificate in
Translation and the VIth CPC also has
given one and same pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/-i.e.Grade Pay of
Rs. 4200/- to Jr. Translators (CSOLS), Assistants(CSS) and Stenographers Grade
‘C’( CSSS).
7.
Since it was felt by the Govt. that is not possible for them to implement the
above said order
of the Tribunal
within the stipulated
time- period of 03 months, extension for
time limit was sought
from the Hon’ble Tribunal informing them that the
Govt. is in the process of implementation of their order. The Tribunal vide
their order dated 19.10.2010 in MA NO. 2484/2010 agreed to extend the time
limit for a further period of two months. The text of aforesaid order of the
tribunal is as follows :-
“ Mr. Barera, counsel representing the applicants (respondents in
OA) states that the orders passed by this Tribunal on 25.05.2010 in OA 331/2009
are in the process of implementation and it would take some time for the
reasons as mentioned in this Misc. Application.
For the reasons mentioned in the
Misc. Application, we extend time to implement the orders of this Tribunal
dated 25.05.2010 by two months from
today. MA No. 2484/2010 stands disposed of. “
Time
extension was again sought from the Tribunal, who vide their order dated
18.01.2011 in MA NO. 170/2011, again extended
the time limit to implement the order by one month.
8. In the
meantime, the Department of Expenditure advised the Department of O L that the
applicants should be given
a speaking order rejecting their claim. the Department of OL, however,
did not agree to the observations of the Department of Expenditure and hence the
then Secretary(OL) Smt. Veena Upadhyay convened a joint meeting of the officers
of the Department of Official Language and the
Department of Expenditure on 08.02.2011 in which the
officers of the Deptt. of Expenditure were inter
alia briefed about
the factual position of the case
clearly and in response, they had again sought for a reference/file from the
Department of OL which was sent to them immediately, but they, vide their UO
dated 10.02.2011, reiterated their earlier stand despite presentation of
concrete and solid counter comments by the Department of OL and forced the
administrative department to issue a speaking order to the applicants which was
issued on 29.09.2011and
which resulted into filing the instant OA No. 2051/2012.
9. After filing in
CAT, the case came up for hearing on 25.07.2012, 11.09.2012, 06.11.2012, 19.12.2012,
13.02.2013, 28.02.2013, 04.04.2013, 18.07.2013, 19.08.2013, 20.09.2013 & 13.11.2013 and the
next (and most probably final) date of hearing is 29.11.2013.
10. Sh. S.k. Gaur, I
Ahamad and Arun Vidhyarthi, the office bearers of ''CSOLS Group 'A' Officers
Association'' (Ex office bearers of CSOLS Translators Association) and Sh. D.K. Singh, Ajay Jha and Radha
Raman, the office bearers of '' CSOLS Translators Association'' are often seen attending hearings and interacting with the lawyers. The case is being
fought under the umbrella of CSOLS Translators Association.
11. Since, the
same type of anomaly has once again been created w.e.f.01.01.2006 also, a
prayer has been made in the instant OA '' to direct the respondents to grant
higher pay scales of Rs.1640-2900/-, 2000-3500/- and 2200-4000/- to JHTs, SHTs
and ADs respectively maintaining parity of pay scales between the posts of Assistants/Stenographers
of CSS/CSSS and JHT of CSOLS w.e.f
01.01.1986 and similarly to revise the pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006 also.
We need blessings of all the CSOLS
members at this juncture.
Plz publish the order by which the payscales of JHT was upgraded from 5000 to 5500 and that of SHT from 5500 to 6500 and that of AD(OL) from 6500 to 8000 w.e.f. 11.02.2003. We need the above order for our court case.
ReplyDeleteKindly contact me personally.
ReplyDelete