Facts
The five applicants—four widows of deceased Superintendents and one retired Superintendent—claimed entitlement to revised pay scales from 1 January 1996, or from the later date of joining the relevant post. They challenged orders limiting the revised scales’ operation and their implementation to particular employees or applicants.
Source reference: para. 2In earlier proceedings concerning similar claims, the Tribunal had limited arrears to three years before filing, relying on Union of India v. Tarsem Singh; the High Court later modified that order and held that similarly placed employees were entitled to benefits from 1 January 1996.
Source reference: para. 3The respondents opposed the application on the ground of delay, describing the applicants as fence-sitters.
Source reference: paras. 1, 4Issues
Whether the applicants’ delay in approaching the Tribunal precluded relief on their claim for revised pay benefits from 1 January 1996
Source reference: paras. 1, 4Whether the applicants were entitled to notional benefits from 1 January 1996, subject to verification of their credentials, notwithstanding the delay objection
Source reference: paras. 3–5Law Applied
The Tribunal noted that, in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh (2008) 8 SCC 648, it had previously restricted arrears in comparable service-pay claims to three years before filing.
Source reference: para. 3It also relied on the High Court’s subsequent decision in O.P. (CAT) No. 56/2026 and connected cases, which modified the earlier order and held that similarly placed persons were entitled to benefits from 1 January 1996.
Source reference: para. 3Reasoning
Although the respondents argued that the applicants were delayed fence-sitters, the Tribunal considered that similar claims had already been adjudicated and that the High Court had modified the earlier restriction on arrears, holding that similarly placed persons were entitled to benefits from 1 January 1996.
Source reference: paras. 3–4Taking account of the applicants’ circumstances—four being widows and the fifth an octogenarian—the Tribunal granted relief, conditional on verification of their credentials.
Source reference: paras. 4–5Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the application and directed the respondents to grant the applicants notional benefits from 1 January 1996, subject to verification of their credentials, and to disburse the arrears due within six months of receiving the order.
No costs were awarded.
Source reference: para. 5Original Court PDF
Asha Vijayakumar and OrsvsREVENUE
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Similarly placed late applicants are entitled to notional revised-pay benefits from 1 January 1996, subject to verification.. Asha Vijayakumar and Ors vs REVENUE. CAT - ['Ernakulam']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/similarly-placed-late-applicants-are-entitled-to-notional-revised-pay-benefits-from-1-janu-6d04f3fa7abc43fbace6357f8eec93b0.webp)