Facts
The applicant, a 64-year-old retired Senior Nursing Officer, filed an Original Application (OA) seeking the "stepping up" of her pay to match that of her junior, Ms. Anita Arora, effective from December 2016.
Source reference: para. 1The applicant contends that as the senior employee, she is entitled to this adjustment under the relevant service rules.
Source reference: para. 1On May 29, 2024, the applicant submitted a formal representation (Annexure A-1) to the respondents regarding this pay disparity, which remains pending.
Source reference: para. 1At the admission stage, the applicant’s counsel requested that the Tribunal dispose of the OA by directing the respondents to decide the pending representation through a reasoned and speaking order within a set timeframe.
Source reference: para. 2The respondents’ counsel raised no objection to this proposal.
Source reference: para. 4Issues
Whether the Tribunal should direct the respondents to dispose of the applicant’s pending representation regarding the stepping up of pay at the admission stage of the OA.
Source reference: para. 2 & 5Law Applied
Fundamental Rule 22 (FR 22), which provides for the "stepping up of pay" of a senior employee to match that of a junior in specific circumstances to rectify pay anomalies.
Source reference: para. 1procedural principle of administrative exhaustion, allowing authorities to first decide on an employee’s grievance via a "reasoned and speaking order" before the court adjudicates on the merits.
Source reference: para. 5Reasoning
The Tribunal opted not to delve into the substantive merits of the applicant’s claim or the potential issue of limitation (delay) regarding the 2016 pay claim.
Source reference: para. 6Given the applicant's limited prayer for a time-bound administrative decision and the respondents' consent to this course of action, the Tribunal determined that a judicial direction for an administrative review was the most efficient resolution at this stage.
Source reference: para. 2, 4 & 5This ensures that the executive branch first applies FR 22 to the facts of the case before further judicial intervention is required.
Source reference: para. 5Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the OA at the admission stage without expressing an opinion on the merits or limitation.
The respondents are directed to decide the applicant’s representation dated May 29, 2024, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks of receiving the certified copy of this order.
Source reference: para. 5No costs were awarded.
Source reference: para. 7Original Court PDF
Mrs Gladyes Sanjay MasseyvsDelhi Secretariat
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in