Dear friends,
With your financial and moral support the All India Audit & Accounts Officers Association has filed a case in the Central Administrative tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi for conferment of Gr A status to the Sr.Audit Officers/ Sr Accounts Officer of IA&AD. Extract of the OA is reproduced bellow for your information. The 1st hearing of the case was held on 18/04/2012. Our Secretary General communicated that the case has been taken up by Honorable CAT this day. The Govt. and other respondents have not submitted any reply to the O A. The hearing adjourned to 9th July 2012. P&T Audit Officers & Sr. Audit Officers Association appeals before your fraternity to remit your contribution to the Legal Fund of All India Audit & Accounts Officers Association early so that our Federation can keep up the fight.
I N KIRTANIA
GENERAL SECRETARY
IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI
OA NO. 731/2012
IN THE MATTER OF:
ALL INDIA AUDIT & ACCOUNTS
OFFICERS ASSN. & Ors …PETITIONERS
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & Ors., …RESPONDENTS
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANTS: HARIPRIYA PADMANABHAN
In 1992 The cadre of Senior Audit Officers and Senior Accounts Officers
was created by the Government of India by upgrading 80% of the
posts of Audit Officers and Accounts Officers (in the pay scale of
Rs.2375-3500/-) respectively on a non-functional basis to a scale
of pay which was meant for Group A officers of the Government of
India, i.e Rs. 2200-4000/-. Though this cadre was created and
given the same pay scale as Group A officers, the Government of
India continued to classify them as Group B officers wholly
contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
29-8-2008 The Respondent No.1 in exercise of the powers conferred by
proviso to Article 309 and clause (5) of Article 148 of the
Constitution of India and after consultation with the Respondent
No.2, notified the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
9-4-2009 The Respondent No.3, Department of Personnel & Training issued
a Notification in exercise of the powers conferred by proviso to
Article 309 and Clause 5 of Article 148 of the Constitution read
with Rule 6 of the Central Civil Services Rules, 1965, and in
supersession of the notification dated 20-4-1998, and after
consultation of the Respondent No.2 in relation to persons serving
in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department, classifying the
posts carrying the grade pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3 as Group ‘A’ in
Indian Audit and Accounts Department. Thus, as per the
Respondent No.3’s notification the Sr Audit and Accounts officers
of the Applicant No.1 Organization were to be treated as Group A
officers and given suitable service benefits.
However, despite this Notification, still the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers continued to be treated as Group B officers.
17-4-2009 The Respondent No.3 issued an Office Memorandum under the
Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965 and Clause (4) of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay)
Rules, 2008 providing that all posts in the Central Civil Services
would stand classified strictly in accordance with the norms of pay
band and grade pay or pay scales as prescribed in the Gazette
Notification dated 9-4-2009. It was further stated that in some
Ministry/Departments some posts exist which are not classified as
per the norms laid down by the Department and in such cases,
where the Ministry/Department, proposes to classify the posts
differently, it would be necessary for that Department to send a
specific proposal to the Respondent No.3 giving full justification to
support the proposal within 3 months of the Memorandum so that
the exceptions to the norms of classification dated 9-4-2009 can be
notified.
To the knowledge of the Applicant No.1 organization, no exception
was carved out in respect of the Senior Audit and Accounts
Officers of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department under this
Notification. Hence, by this Notification also the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers were entitled to be treated as Group A officers.
2-3-2010 The Office bearers of the Applicant No.1 Association held an
Agenda meeting with the Dy C&AG to discuss various issues
pertaining to the Petitioner’s service conditions. The Applicant No.1
association also specifically raised the issue of conferment of
Group A status to the Sr Audit and Accounts officers pursuant to
the Notification of the Dept of Personnel and Training dated 9th
April 2009. It is pertinent to state that in this meeting the plea of
the Association for grant of Group ‘A’ status was agreed to in
principle by the Department.
7-4-2011 Proposal was sent by the C&AG seeking consent of the Department
for classifying the Senior Audit & Accounts Officers/Sr Divisional
Accounts Officers (in PB-3 Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/-) as Group A in terms of Government of India Gazette Notification dated 9-4-
2009.
27-9-2011 Mr D.Balasubramaniam, who is a retired Senior Officer of the
IA&AD, made an enquiry under the RTI Act from the Respondent
No.1 regarding conferment of Group A status to the cadre of Sr
Audit and Accounts Officers
31-10-2011 The Respondent No.1 in response to the RTI Query, forwarded
some of the relevant note sheets of the file dealing with the issue of
conferment of Group ‘A’ status to the Sr Audit/Accounts Officers of
the IA&AD which include the following:
a. The Respondent No.1, issued an Office Memorandum dated
11-4-2011 pursuant to the request of the Respondent No.2
for treating the Senior Audit and Senior Accounts Officers of
the Petitioners Association as Group ‘A’ employees, wherein
the Respondent No.1 stated that the request cannot be
acceded to for the reasons that:
i. The Classification as Group ‘B’ was a conscious
decision by the Government of India in 1992 itself
when the posts were created;
ii. The Cadre was created on promotion only on non-
functional posts and are being supervised by Jr Time
Scale Officers of organized Group ‘A’ Accounts
services;
iii. This promotion to the post of Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers is made without consulting UPSC,
while for promotion to all Group ‘A’ posts, consultation
with UPSC is mandatory;
iv. The Senior Audit and Senior Accounts Officers are
feeder grade for induction into Jr Time Scale of
Organised Group A services; v. The office of the Respondent No.2 was consulted
prior to the classification of the said posts as Group ‘B’
after the said Vth CPC and the office of the CAG had
indicated that they would have no objection to the
classification of the said officers to be Group ‘B’.
vi. Any change in the classification would result in
demands from other categories;
vii. VIth Pay Commission has not made any
recommendations in this regard.
b. On 17-6-2011 the Respondent No.1, Department of
Expenditure again passed an office note stating that the
request for upgrading the classification cannot be
considered. The same reasons were reiterated.
c. Another Office Memorandum dated 7-7-2011 issued by the
Respondent No.1 after further examining the issue of
upgrading the classification of the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers and the same was stated to be not feasible.
1-11-2011 Mr Kannan, a retired Senior Audit Officer of the IA&AD, sent a
request under the RTI to the Respondent No.1 in respect of the
circular of the DOPT’s (Respondent No.3) order dated 9-4-2009,
requesting that the list of “things done” and “omitted to be done”
mentioned under the said Notification may be furnished alongwith
the relevant note sheets. This request was transferred by the
Respondent No.1 to the Respondent No.3 for necessary action on
18-11-2011.
14-12-2011 The Respondent No.3 in response to the RTI request regarding
things done and omitted to be done, responded saying that no
such lists are maintained or available with the Central Public
Information Officer. 3-1-2012 Mr Kannan sent an appeal against the response received from the
Respondent No.3 dated 14-12-2011 stating that no lists of things
done or omitted to be done under the DOPT circular dated 9-4-
2009 was available/maintained by the CPIO.
13-1-2012 The Respondent No.3 responded to the RTI Application stating that
no such information regarding things done and omitted to be done
are being maintained and that the said clause is part of standard
drafting language.
27-1-2012 The Respondent No.2 forwarded the Office Memorandum of the
Respondent No.1 dated 7th July 2011 in the context of the demand
of the Applicant Association for Group A status to the Sr Audit and
Accounts Officers.
8-2-2012 The Respondent No.2 forwarded to the Applicant a copy of the
Record Notes of Discussion of the meeting held on 23-1-2012
between the Dy Comptroller and Auditor General and the office
bearers of the Applicant. The said Record makes it clear that the
Respondent No.2 has stated that for conferment of Group A status
on Sr Audit and Accounts officers of the Applicant organization the
permission of the Government of India is required which has been
rejected.
29Feb ’12 In view of the rejection of the repeated requests of the Applicant
No.1 Association, the Applicants have been constrained to file the
present OA challenging the classification of the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers as Group B officers as being violative of Article
14 and Article 148 of the Constitution of India as well as contrary
to the Notifications issued by the Respondent No.3 in regard to
classification of posts in accordance with the pay. The Applicant
No.1 has no grievance redressal mechanism over and above the
Department. IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
1. ORDER AGAINST WHICH APPLICATION IS MADE
The application seeks to challenge the Office Memoranda of the Respondent
No.1 dated 11-4-2011, 17-6-2011 and 7-7-2011 and the letter dated 27-1-
2012 which constitutes an implied rejection of the Respondent No.2 to the request of the Applicant No.1 organisation to treat the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department as Group A
officers. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-1 is a copy of the Office
Memorandum dated 11-4-2011. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-2 is a copy
of the Office Memorandum dated 17-6-2011 and Annexed hereto as
Annexure A-3 is a copy of the Office Memorandum dated 7-7-2011.
Annexed hereto as Annexure A-4 is a copy of the letter dated 27-1-2012 of
the Respondent No.2. Since the Applicants came to know about the said
Office Memoranda challenged herein only after the RTI inquiry and also
when the Respondent No.2 forwarded the OM of the Respondent No.1 dated
7-7-2011 on 27-1-2012 to the Applicant No.1, the Applicants have filed the
present Application only now.
2. JURISDICTION
The above named applicants declare that the present application is within
the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal as the grievances of the applicants
can only be addressed by the Head Office of the Respondents No.1, 2 and 3
which are situated at New Delhi. This Hon’ble Tribunal has the necessary
jurisdiction to grant the reliefs sought in the present application.
3. LIMITATION:
The above named applicants further declare that the present O.A. is
within limitation as per section 21 of the Central Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985.
4. BRIEF FACTS
i The Applicant No.1 is the All India Audit and Accounts Officers
Association, and is recognised by the Office of the Comptroller and
Auditor General of India as the Federation under the Central Civil
Services (Recognition of Service Associations) Rules, 1993. The present
Application has been duly signed by the Secretary General of the
Applicant No.1 who has been duly authorised by a Resolution passed to
this effect. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-5 is a copy of the Resolution
authorizing the Secretary to sign the present Application on behalf of the Applicant No.1. The Applicant Association consists of employees
belonging to the cadres of Accounts/Senior Accounts Officers and
Audit/Senior Audit Officers of the Indian Audit and Accounts
Department. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-_6 is a copy of the
Memorandum of Association of the Applicant No.1. The Secretary
General of the Applicant has the authority to sign papers and do all such
acts as necessary from time to time under Article 7(A)(vi)(c). Annexed
hereto as Annexure A-7 is a copy of the Recognition letter of the Office
of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
ii. The Applicant No.2 is a Senior Audit Officer working in the office of the
Principal Accountant General (Audit), Delhi. The Applicant No.3 is a
Senior Accounts Officer working in the Office of the Accountant General
(Accounts & Entitlement) 1, MP, Gwalior.
iii. In the year 1992, the cadre of Senior Audit Officers and Senior Accounts
Officers was created by the Government of India by upgrading 80% of
the posts of Audit Officers and Accounts Officers (in the pay scale of
Rs.2375-3500/-) respectively to a scale of pay which was meant for
Group A officers of the Government of India, i.e Rs. 2200-4000/-.
Though this cadre was created and given the same pay scale as Group A
officers, the Government of India continued to classify them as Group B
officers wholly contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
iv. On 29-8-2008, the Respondent No.1 in exercise of the powers conferred
by proviso to Article 309 and clause (5) of Article 148 of the Constitution
of India and after consultation with the Respondent No.2, notified the
Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Under the Revised Pay
Rules, the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of the Applicant No.1
organisation were placed in PB-3 band of payscale with grade pay of
Rs5400/- similar to Group A officers of the various Departments of the
Government of India. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-_8 is a copy of the
Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. v. On 9-4-2009 the Respondent No.3, Department of Personnel & Training
issued a Notification in exercise of the powers conferred by proviso to
Article 309 and Clause 5 of Article 148 of the Constitution read with
Rule 6 of the Central Civil Services Rules, 1965, and in supersession of
the notification dated 20-4-1998, and after consultation with the
Respondent No.2 in relation to persons serving in the Indian Audit and
Accounts Department, classifying the posts carrying the grade pay of
Rs.5400/- in PB-3 as Group ‘A’ in Indian Audit and Accounts
Department. Thus, as per the Respondent No.3’s notification the Sr
Audit and Accounts officers of the Applicant Organisation were to be
treated as Group A officers and given suitable service benefits. However,
despite this Notification, still the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers
continue to be treated as Group B officers. Annexed hereto as Annexure
A-9 is a copy of the Notification dated 9-4-2009.
vi. The Applicant therefore through its office bearers made various
representations to the Respondent No.2 to correct this anomaly and
requested for conferment of Group A status on the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers who were drawing the same pay as other Group A
officers of the Central Civil Services.
vii. In the meanwhile on 17-4-2009, the Respondent No.3 issued an Office
Memorandum under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control
and Appeal) Rules 1965 and Clause (4) of the Central Civil Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 providing that all posts in the Central Civil
Services would stand classified strictly in accordance with the norms of
pay band and grade pay or pay scales as prescribed in the Gazette
Notification dated 9-4-2009. It was further stated that in some
Ministry/Departments some posts exist which are not classified as per
the norms laid down by the Department and in such cases, where the
Ministry/Department, proposes to classify the posts differently, it would
be necessary for that Department to send a specific proposal to the Respondent No.3 giving full justification to support the proposal within
3 months of the Memorandum, so that the exceptions to the norms of
classification dated 9-4-2009 can be notified. Annexed hereto as
Annexure A-10 is a copy of the Office Memorandum dated 17-4-2009.
To the knowledge of the Applicant organization, no exception was carved
out in respect of the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of the Indian
Audit and Accounts Department under this Notification. Hence, by this
Notification also the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers were entitled to
be treated as Group A officers.
viii. On 2-3-2010, the Office bearers of the Applicant No.1 Association held
an Agenda meeting with the Dy CAG to discuss various issues pertaining
to the Applicants service conditions. The Applicant No.1 association also
specifically raised the issue of conferment of Group A status to the Sr
Audit and Accounts officers pursuant to the Notification of the Dept of
Personnel and Training dated 9th April 2009. It is pertinent to state that
in this meeting the plea of the Association for grant of Group ‘A’ status
was agreed to in principle by the Department. Annexed hereto as
Annexure A-11 is a copy of the Minutes of the Agenda Meeting held
between the Applicant Association and the Dy Comptroller and Auditor
General.
ix. On 7-4-2011 a letter was sent by the CAG seeking consent of the
Department for classifying the Senior Audit & Accounts Officers/Sr
Divisional Accounts Officers (in PB-3 Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/-) as Group
A in terms of Government of India Gazette Notification dated 9-4-2009.
Annexed hereto as Annexure A-12 is a copy of the proposal of the
Respondent No.2’s office dated 7-4-2011.
x. Despite repeated follow up by the Applicant No.1, no concrete
information was forthcoming regarding the exact status of their request
for the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of the Indian Audit and
Accounts Department to be treated as Group A, in view of Article 14 of the Constitution of India read with Article 148 and further in view of the
specific Notifications of the Respondent No.3.
xi. Mr D.Balasubramaniam, who is a retired Senior Officer of the IA&AD,
made an enquiry under the RTI Act from the Respondent No.1 regarding
conferment of Group A status to the cadre of Sr Audit and Accounts
Officers on 27-9-2011.
xii. On 31-10-2011, the Respondent No.1 in response to the RTI Query,
forwarded some of the relevant note sheets of the file dealing with the
issue of conferment of Group ‘A’ status to the Sr Audit/Accounts Officers
of the IA&AD which include the following:
a. The Respondent No.1, issued an Office Memorandum dated
11-4-2011 pursuant to the request of the Respondent No.2
for treating the Senior Audit and Senior Accounts Officers of
the Petitioners Association as Group ‘A’ employees, wherein
the Respondent No.1 stated that the request cannot be
acceded to for the reasons that:
i. The Classification as Group ‘B’ was a conscious
decision by the Government of India in 1992 itself
when the posts were created;
ii. The Cadre was created on promotion only on non-
functional posts and are being supervised by Jr Time
Scale Officers of organized Group ‘A’ Accounts
services;
iii. This promotion to the post of Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers is made without consulting UPSC,
while for promotion to all Group ‘A’ posts, consultation
with UPSC is mandatory;
iv. The Senior Audit and Senior Accounts Officers are
feeder grade for induction into Jr Time Scale of
Organised Group A services; v. The office of the Respondent No.2 was consulted
prior to the classification of the said posts as Group ‘B’
after the Vth CPC and the office of the C&AG had
indicated that they would have no objection to the
classification of the said officers to be Group ‘B’.
vi. Any change in the classification would result in
demands from other categories;
vii. VIth Pay Commission has not made any
recommendations in this regard.
b. On 17-6-2011 the Respondent No.1, Department of
Expenditure again passed an office note stating that the
request for upgrading the classification cannot be
considered. The same reasons were reiterated.
c. Another Office Memorandum dated 7-7-2011 issued by the
Respondent No.1 after further examining the issue of
upgrading the classification of the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers and the same was stated to be not feasible.
xiii. The Applicant No.1 organisation was surprised at the reasons
given by the Respondent No.1 in the Office Memorandum for
continuing to treat the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers as
Group B, as the same are wholly misplaced and mis-conceived and
arbitrary. What is more, there is no reference to the Notifications of
April 2009 of the Respondent No.3 which is made under the
Constitution of India and the Central Civil Services Rules which
bind the Respondent No.1.
Annexed hereto as Annexure A-13 is a copy of the letter dated 31-
10-2011 of the Respondent NO.1
xiv. On 1-11-2011, Mr.Kannan a retired Senior Audit Officer sent a
request under the RTI to the Respondent No.1 in respect of the
circular of the DOPT’s (Respondent No.3) order dated 9-4-2009, requesting that the list of “things done” and “omitted to be done”
mentioned under the said Notification may be furnished alongwith
the relevant note sheets. This request was transferred by the
Respondent No.1 to the Respondent No.3 for necessary action on
18-11-2011. Annexed hereto as Annexure A- 14 is a copy of this
Application dated 1-11-2011.
xv. On 14-12-2011 the Respondent No.3 in response to the RTI
request regarding things done and omitted to be done, responded
saying that no such lists are maintained or available with the
Central Public Information Officer. Annexed hereto as Annexure A-
15 is a copy of this letter dated 14-12-2011. On 3-1-2012 Mr
Kannan sent an appeal against the response received from the
Respondent No.3 dated 14-12-2011 stating that no lists of things
done or omitted to be done under the DOPT circular dated 9-4-
2009 was available/maintained by the CPIO. Annexed hereto as
Annexure A- 16 is a copy of this Appeal dated 14-12-2011. On
13-1-2012 the Respondent No.3 responded to the RTI Application
stating that no such information regarding things done and
omitted to be done are being maintained and that the said clause
is part of standard drafting language. Annexed hereto as
Annexure A- 17 is a copy of this Reply dated 13-1-2012.
xvi. On 27-1-2012, in view of the repeated demands made by the
Applicant in regard to conferment of Group A status to the
Respondent No.2, the Respondent No.2 forwarded the Office
Memoradum of the Respondent No.1 dated 7th July 2011 in the
context of the demand of the Applicant Association for Group A
status to the Sr Audit and Accounts Officers. This letter dated 27-
1-2012, forwarding the Office Memorandum of the Respondent
No.1, thus constitutes an implied rejection of the demands of the Applicant Association for conferment of Group A status to its
Senior Audit and Accounts Officers.
xvii. In view of the rejection of the repeated requests of the Applicant
Association, the Applicant has been constrained to file the present
OA challenging the classification of the Senior Audit and Accounts
Officers as Group B officers as being violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India as well as contrary to the Notifications issued
by the Respondent No.3 in regard to classification of posts in
accordance with the pay and Article 148 of the Constitution of
India.
5. GROUNDS
A) Because the action of the Respondents in continuing to treat the
Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of the Indian Audit and
Accounts Department as Group B officers is clearly contrary to the
Office Memoranda of the Respondent No.3 dated 9-4-2009 and 17-
4-2009;
B) Because the action of the Respondents in not conferring Group A
status to the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers is contrary to the
Central Civil Services Rules, 1965 as well as Article 309 of the
Constitution of India;
C) Because the action of the Respondents is wholly contrary to Article
14 of the Constitution of India, as it tantamount to treating equals
in an unequal manner. It is respectfully submitted all other officers
of the Government of India, drawing the same pay scale as the
Senior Audit and Accounts Officers in the IA&AD, Pay & Accounts,
Postal Accounts Services and Railway Accounts Services, are being
treated as Group A officers, whereas only the officers from these
few services have been singled out for being conferred a lower
grade though they draw the same pay scale as other Group A
officers of the Central Government. It is submitted that the reason for not classifying the Sr Audit and Accounts Officers of IA&AD as
Group A, has no nexus with the objects sought to be achieved. It is
further submitted that even if the office of the Respondent No.2 did
not object to the classification of the Sr Audit and Accounts
Officers of the IA&AD as Group B despite the change in pay scale
in 1992, the same cannot be a justification for refusal of this
status, as equality being a fundamental right under Article 14
cannot be waived.
D. The Applicant further submits that the reasons given in the Office
Memoranda of the Respondent No.1 dated 11-4-2011, 17-6-2011
and 7-7-2011, is wholly misconceived and arbitrary for the
following reasons:
i. The reasoning that UPSC permission is not required for
promotion to Senior Audit and Accounts Officers Post and
therefore the said post cannot be treated as Group A, is
totally misconceived for the reason, that it is only because
the post of Senior Audit and Accounts Officers are not
treated as Group A, no prior permission of UPSC is required.
Once the said post is conferred Group A status, UPSC
approval would be required for promotion to this post;
ii. Merely because the post of Senior Audit and Accounts
Officers Post is a feeder category for the post of Junior Time
Scale Officers in IA&AD cannot be a ground for not treating
the same as Group A. This is for the reason that, even within
each Group, there is a hierarchy for the purposes of
promotion and there is promotion from one level to another
level within the same Group. For instance, Group A cadre in
the IA&AD consists of Dy Accountant General/Deputy
Director, Senior Deputy Accountant General/Director,
Accountant General/Principal Director, Principal Accountant
General/Director General etc. Though all these designations are part of Group A of the IA&AD, the Dy Accountant
General and the Deputy Director, are a feeder category for
the post of Senior Deputy Accountant General and Director.
The Senior Deputy Accountant General and Director are
feeder category for the next level of Accountant General and
Principal Director and so on. This clearly establishes that
merely because one section of officers is a feeder to the
immediate higher post, it cannot be said that both the posts
cannot be part of the same Group. The analogy given in this
ground applies across all the Departments in the Central
Civil Services and not limited to the IA&AD alone. Thus,
merely because one set of officers are a feeder category to the
higher post is no ground for not granting Group status based
on scale of pay.
iii. The mere fact that the Respondent No.2 in 1992 had not
objected to the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers being
treated as Group B despite being on the pay scale as the
Group A officers, cannot be a ground to deny the right of the
Senior Audit and Accounts Officers. This is for the reason
that a fundamental right, being the right to equality under
Article 14 cannot be waived. In any event, in light of the
subsequent April 2009 notifications, also the alleged waiver
in 1992 by the Respondent No.2 cannot stand in the way of
the conferment of Group A status.
iv. The mere fact that other Departments would also raise
similar issue if the demand of the Applicant is granted is
irrelevant to the whole issue. If the demand of the Applicant
is otherwise justified in law and facts, merely because others
may make similar demands is no ground for refusing the
same. In any event, it is submitted that even this ground is
wholly misconceived in the facts of the present case, as already stated earlier; all other government employees of the
pay scale PB-3 are treated as Group A, except the Senior
Audit and Accounts Officers of the IA&AD, Pay & Accounts
Office, Postal Accounts and Railway Accounts. Thus only a
small percentage of officers received PB-3 pay scale are being
treated in this wholly arbitrary and unreasonable manner.
v. Merely because the Government consciously chose to retain
the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers as Group B in 1992,
is again no ground for not granting them Group A status if
they are entitled to the same under Article 14 of the
Constitution of India as well as the DOPT Office memoranda.
E. The Applicants further submit that the above Office Memoranda do
not even mention or discuss the DOPT Notifications of 2009 by
which the Applicants have to be given Group A status.
F. It is further submitted that under Article 148(5), the conditions of
services of the persons working under the Respondent No.2 should
be fixed in consultation with the Respondent No.2. In the present
case, the Respondent No.2 has opined that the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers should be conferred Group A status both to the
Respondent 1 and Respondent 3. This being the case, the
Respondents 1 and 3 ought to confer Group A status on the Senior
Audit and Accounts Officers of the IA&AD. The refusal of the
Respondent No.1 constitutes an infringement of Article 148(5) of
the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that if the opinion
of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India is not treated as
binding on the Respondents 1 and 3 in respect of fixing service
conditions of the officers working under him, the independence of
the entire Respondent No.2 which is a Constitutional Authority
would be at stake.
6. THE DEPARTMENTAL REMEDY EXHAUSTED. The Applicant No.1 made various representations to the Respondents
seeking redressal of their grievances. The Senior Audit and Accounts
Officers do not have a formal grievance redressal mechanism being Group B
officers though other Groups have formal grievance redressal mechanisms.
Though the Respondent No.2 recommended to the Respondent No.1 for the
conferment of Group A status to the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of
the Indian Audit and Accounts Department, no positive response has been
forthcoming. On the contrary, the Respondent No.1 has merely forwarded its
Office Memoranda where the reasons as to why the request cannot be
granted has been recorded, thus by implication rejecting the present request
for conferment of Group A status. The Respondent No.2 has also merely
forwarded this Office Memorandum, thus by implication making it clear that
the Applicant’s request cannot be considered positively. In this background
it is clear that there is no effective departmental remedy that is open to the
Applicants.
7. MATTER NOT PREVIOUSLY FILED
The Applicants have not filed any other application / petition before any
court of law regarding the subject matter.
8. RELIEF SOUGHT
The Applicants pray that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be graciously pleased to:
a) hold that the classification of the Senior Audit and Accounts Officers of
the IA&AD as Group B officers despite their drawing the pay scale of
Group A officers is arbitrary and unreasonable;
b) Implement the DOPT circulars dated 9-4-2009 and 17-4-2009;
c) Set aside the Office Memoranda dated 11-4-2011, 17-6-2011 and 7-7-
2011 passed by the Respondent No.1;
d) Set aside the implied rejection of the Respondent No.2 vide its letter dated
27-1-2012;
e) Direct the Respondents to confer Group A status on the Senior Audit and
Accounts Officers who are drawing the same Grade Pay as other Group A
officers of the Central Civil Services with effect from 1-1-2006; f) Pass any other order(s) or directions that this Hon’ble Tribunal may
deem fit.
Any other order / direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal may be also passed:
9. INTERIM RELIEF - No interim relief is sought for the time being.
10. Application is being filed through Advocate.
11. Particulars of Banks Draft/Postal Order filed in respect of the application
fee.
(a) Postal Order No. _______
(b) Issuing Post Office ___________
12. List of enclosures:
As per Index.
APPLICANTS
Through
HARIPRIYA PADMANABHAN
NEW DELHI A-144, NITI BAGH, NEW DELHI
DATE:
