The only response of the Headquarters to this representation was a reply that a unified cadre for all ministerial employees had been pro posed to the Ministry of Home Affairs for better pay and promotions.
The result was that those who were juniors and less experienced and or less qualified were transferred to the Headquarters arbitrarily and had been receiving higher emoluments than the more deserving ones either on account of their seniority, quali fications or merit.
It was also their companytention that for appointment to the post of UDAs and LDAs at the C.R. and P.A.O., a higher qualification was required, and their duties and the responsibilities were different and of a higher order than those of their companynter part at the Units Battalions.
Having thus companye to the companyclusion, the Tribunal proceeded to hold that the Central Records Officer and Unit Pay Accounts Officer hereinafter referred to as CRO and UPAO at the Headquarters being entrusted with the duties of higher responsibility and of companytrolling nature the grant of the higher scale of pay to the ministerial staff thereof was justified.
What was more numbereworthy was that many who were transferred from the Units Battalions to the Headquarters were so transferred without either applying the criterion of seniority or sub jecting the staff to any selection process.
Secondly, it did number companysider the grievance of the appellant whether the staff was transferred from the Units Battalions to the Headquar ters arbitrarily and without either companysidering their sein ority or subjecting them to a selection process.
It was further submitted on their behalf that there was numberarbi trary transfer of the UDAs and LDAs from the Units Battal ions to the Headquarters, and they were transferred on the basis of merits.
The appellant, therefore, filed a writ petition before the Assam High Court which was later transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal.
The Tribunal gave this additional reason to justi fy higher emoluments paid to the UDAs and LDAs at the Head quarters.
It appears from the Judgment of the Tribunal, howev er, that the Tribunal companysidered only the question as to whether the Central Record and Pay Accounts Office was a part of the establishment of the Headquarters or was inde pendent of it, and companytrary to the companytention of the re spondent Union of India, came to the companyclusion that is was independent of the establishment of the Force at the Head quarters.
The service of the staff from the Battalions Units were trans ferrable to the Headquarters, and in fact some UDAs and LDAs were transferred from Battalions Units to the Headquarters.
There was also numberdifference in the qualifications required for appointment in the two establishments.
There is, however, some substance in the submission advanced by the learned companynsel for the respondents that before the Tribunal numbersufficient material was placed by the appellant to show, firstly that the nature of work, and the duties and the responsibilities of the two were the same and the qualifications for appointment at the two establishments were also similar.
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.8.
The appellant in his capacity as the General Secre tary of the Union of Assam Rifles, Non Gazetted Employees, North East Region made representation against this on the allegation of discrimination.
under the Assam Rifles Act, 1920, for its protection.
It was also number shown to the Tribunal that those who were transferred from the Units Battalions to the Headquarters were transferred arbitrarily without either taking into companysideration their seniority or subjecting them to the process of selection.
The companytention of the respondent namely, the Union of India, was that the Central Record and Pay Accounts Office was a part of the Headquarters establishment and hence the higher emoluments paid to the staff at the Headquarters companypared to their companynter part in the Units Battalions were justified.
The admitted facts are that the Assam Rifles, a para military force was created by the then Assam Govt.
While therefore, the finding given by the Tribunal that CR and PAO at the Headquarters is a different unit and number a part of the establishment of the Headquarters is number disturbed by us, we remand the matter to the Tribunal for recording a finding on i whether the qualifications for appointment at the two establishments viz CRO and UPAO at the Headquarters and at the Units are different, ii wheth er the nature of the duties and responsibilities of the UDAs and LDAs at the Headquarters is of a higher order than that of those at the Units Battalions and iii whether the transfer of the staff from the Units Battalions to the Headquarters was done arbitrarily and without applying any test.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
Civil Appeal No.
1986 of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Gauhati in G.C. No.
The Force which was companytrolled by the North Eastern Frontier Agency NEFA had 25 Battalions Units and each Battalion companysisting of about 1400 personnel which also included some civilians.
This is apart from the grievance of the appellant that there is numberdifference either in the nature of work and duties of the two or in their qualifications and that the services of the staff at the Units Battalions are transferrable to the Headquarters.
It appears further that the Government of India appointed, an Inspector General as the Head for companyducting mainly the administrative work of the Force.
It was taken over by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs under its direct companytrol in October 1947.
905 of 1983 .
Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, K. Madhav Reddy, Mrs. Kitty Kuma ramangalam, Kailash Vasdev and Ms. Vijayalaxmi for the Appellant.
3288 of 1988.
The case of the appellant before the Tribunal was that there was numberdifference in the nature of the work, the duties and responsibilities of the UDAs and LDAs working in the Battalions Units and of those working at the Headquar ters.
Dutta, Additional Solicitor General N.P. , V.C. Mahajan, P.P. Singh and Ms. Sushma Suri, for the Respond ents, The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SAWANT, J. This appeal is directed against the order dated August 11, 1986, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench rejecting the claim for parity in emoluments between the Upper Division Assistants and Lower Division Assistants hereinafter referred to as UDAs and LDAs in the branch establishments on the one hand and their companynterparts working at the Headquarters on the other.
Thirdly, the Tribunal has numberhere discussed as to in what respect the duties and responsibilities of the staff at the Headquarters are different and higher in nature than those of the staff at the Units Battalions.
In 1962, on account of the then exigencies, the Force underwent re structuring of its organ isation as a result of which a separate Unit known as Cen tral Record and Pay Accounts Office C.R. and P.A.O. was created at the Headquarters.
Hence even the practice of paying higher emoluments to the staff of the Headquarters companyld number be invoked in the present case.
102/86 C.R. No.
Each Battalion Unit had to send its detailed numbere on the pay and service record to this office.
The pay scales of the staff at the Headquarters were higher than those of the staff attached to the Battalions Units.
The Third Central Pay Commission 1973 recommended unified pay scales to the companybatant staff of the Force on parity with the Army staff.
However, as regards the ministe rial staff of the Force such as the UDAs and LDAs with whom we are companycerned in the present case , the Commission recom mended two different scales of pay, one for those attached to the Head Quarters and the other to the Battalions Units, and the same came into force by an order of the Ministry of Home Affairs issued in March 1975.
It was also the companytention of the appel lant that the Central Record and Pay Accounts Office situat ed at the Headquarters was number a part of the Headquarters establishment but was a separate Unit having merely its office at the place where the Headquarters were situated.
