Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
ALL INDIA DETENCE ESTATE EXPLOYEES ASSOCIATION.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 27/08/1998
BENCH:
G T NANAVATI, S RAJENDRA BABU.
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
JUDGEMENT
This appeal against the order of the Central
Administrative Tribunal deserves to be dismissed as we are
of the opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal is
correct.
The only question raised before the Tribunal was
whether appellant nos. 2 & 3 were entitled to the benefit
of one increment under Fundamental Rule 22-C on their
promotion from the post of Technical Assistant to the post
of office Superintendent Grade-II in 1988. The Tribunal
held that appellant nos. 2 & 3 were governed by Rule 7 of
the Civilians in Defence Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1986
and not by the Fundamental Rule 22-C. We are also of the
opinion that the appellant nos. 2 & 3 being civilians in
defence services the specific rule applied to them and not
the general provision contained in FR 22-C. Moreover, the
two cadres of Technical Assistant and Office Superintendent
Grade-II stood merged with effect from 1.1.86 and the two
pay-scales attached to theirr cadres also merged with effect
from the same date. Therefore, there could not have been any
promotion within the cadre in the year 1988. That being so,
the situation of qranting benefit under Fundamental Rule
22-C did not arise at all because there were no promotion to
a higher post or to a post carrying higher duties. As the
claim of the appellants was misconceived it was rightly
rejected by the Tribunal. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal
with no order as to costs.