Promotees are entitled to minimum entry pay in upgraded scales regardless of the post’s recruitment source.

The applicant was promoted to the post of Junior Accounts Officer (JAO) on a regular basis on 03.07.2008

Following the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), the Department of Posts merged the posts of JAO and Assistant Accounts Officer (AAO) into a common Pay Band (PB-2) with a Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- via notification dated 25.06.2009

The applicant retired on 31.01.2023

Relying on the decision in K.T. Joseph v. Union of India (OA No. 146/2016, CAT Ernakulam), which was upheld by the Kerala High Court and the Supreme Court, the applicant sought pay fixation in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 7500-12000 from the date of his promotion

The respondents refused, contending that the K.T. Joseph judgment was in personam and that the AAO cadre lacked an element of direct recruitment, making entry pay provisions inapplicable

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to have his pay fixed in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 7500-12000 with corresponding revision in PB-2 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- effective from 03.07.2008

2. Whether the judicial precedent set in K.T. Joseph regarding pay fixation upon the merger of JAO/AAO cadres is applicable only in personam or extends to similarly situated employees

The Tribunal applied the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, specifically Rule 13 and the First Schedule, Part B, Section II

It relied on the constitutional principle of equality under Article 14, asserting that direct recruits and promotees in the same cadre cannot be treated differently regarding pay scales

The court followed the precedent in Kamlakar & Ors. v. Union of India, which held that "birth marks" (mode of entry) are irrelevant once employees are in the same cadre

It also referenced the Ministry of Finance OM dated 28.09.2018 regarding entry pay for promotees

The binding nature of K.T. Joseph v. Union of India

The Tribunal found the issue to be res integra (already decided) based on the K.T. Joseph case

It rejected the respondents' argument that the judgment was in personam, noting that the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the SLP affirmed the legal principle even if the question of law was kept open

The Tribunal reasoned that the Department of Posts' clarification dated 29.09.2022—which denied benefits because the cadre lacked direct recruitment—was discriminatory and violative of Article 14

It held that if JAOs in other departments received these benefits under the OM dated 28.09.2018, postal JAOs could not be excluded simply because of the absence of direct recruitment in their specific wing

The court observed that for the purpose of the 2008 Rules, the merged scale must be viewed as Rs. 7500-12000, and the minimum pay must be fixed accordingly

It held that the applicant is entitled to pay fixation in the revised structure under CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, reckoning his basic pay in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 7500-12000 effective from 03.07.2008

The respondents were directed to issue fresh fixation orders and pay all consequential arrears within two months from the date of receipt of the order

No costs were awarded