Upgraded pay scales apply notionally from 1 January 1996 and actually from 21 April 2004, with arrears payable accordingly.

The applicant, widow of late Shri Arvind Kumar Sharma, challenged the restriction contained in the Ministry of Finance Office Memorandum dated 21 April 2004 and the consequential communication dated 11 May 2004, insofar as the upgraded pay scales were made applicable actually only from 21 April 2004 rather than from 1 January 1996.

She also challenged the rejection letter dated 18 July 2025 issued by the Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore North Commissionerate.

The applicant sought refixation of her late husband’s pay in the revised scales of ₹6,500–10,500 for Inspectors and ₹7,500–12,000 for Superintendents, with actual arrears and consequential death benefits from 1 January 1996.

The Tribunal noted that the issue had already been considered in earlier Original Applications and by the Karnataka High Court in Shri A. Panduranga Naik v. Union of India, W.P. No. 32729/2025 and connected matters, decided on 22 July 2026.

Whether the applicant’s late husband was entitled to the benefit of the upgraded pay scales notionally with effect from 1 January 1996 and actually with effect from 21 April 2004, pursuant to the Office Memorandum dated 21 April 2004?

Whether the applicant was entitled to arrears and consequential benefits from 21 April 2004, notwithstanding the respondents’ rejection of her claim?

Whether the restriction in the Office Memorandum dated 21 April 2004 concerning the date of actual application of the revised pay scales required modification?

The Tribunal exercised jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

It applied the principle of judicial consistency and followed its earlier decisions in OAs Nos. 94/2024, 265/2024, 410/2024, 411/2024 and 663/2024, which recognised the upgraded pay scales notionally from 1 January 1996 and actually from 21 April 2004.

It further followed the Karnataka High Court’s decision in Shri A. Panduranga Naik v. Union of India, W.P. No. 32729/2025 and connected matters, which set aside the restriction limiting arrears and granted arrears from 21 April 2004.

Accordingly, the governing rule was that the revised pay-scale benefit would operate notionally from 1 January 1996, while the monetary and consequential benefits would be available actually from 21 April 2004.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s claim was covered by its earlier decisions and the binding effect of the Karnataka High Court’s ruling on the same pay-scale issue.

Since the respondents’ counsel had no objection to disposal of the application on identical terms, the Tribunal did not undertake an independent re-examination of the pay-scale entitlement.

Applying the established distinction between notional fixation and actual monetary benefits, it directed that the upgraded pay scales be extended to the applicant’s late husband notionally from 1 January 1996 and actually from 21 April 2004.

The Tribunal also granted arrears and consequential benefits from 21 April 2004, while preserving the applicant’s liberty to seek further relief if the respondents extended actual benefits from 1 January 1996 to similarly situated employees.

The respondents were directed to extend the upgraded pay scales to the applicant’s late husband notionally from 1 January 1996 and actually from 21 April 2004.

The Office Memorandum dated 21 April 2004 was modified to that extent.

The applicant was held entitled to arrears and consequential benefits from 21 April 2004, with liberty to pursue a claim for benefits from 1 January 1996 if such benefits were granted to similarly situated persons.

Compliance was directed within 12 weeks from receipt of the certified copy of the order, with no order as to costs.