70 34 Imp.
One S. Dhaiya was also selected and appointed as Assistant Legal along with the appellant.
The short question for companysideration is whether he was entitled to the increment in the revised scale of pay Rs 60 or in the unrevised scale Rs 15 .
1 of the memorandum, which is relevant, is as under SI.
Gill companypleted one years service on 26 1 1986 and became entitled to the grant of an annual increment.
The Government of India issued office memorandum dated 4 5 1987 i wherein various clarifications in respect of the Rules were given.
As mentioned above S.S. Dhaiya was selected and appointed along with the appellant.
On companypletion of one years service Gill was granted annual increment in the existing scale unrevised .
This appeal by Gill is against the judgment of the Tribunal.
The Government of India Instructions companytained in the office memorandum dated 7 1 1971 are as under The undersigned is directed to invite a reference on the recommendation of the Third Pay Commission companytained in para 29 of Chapter 8 in Volume I of their Report to the effect that in future, an increment should be granted from the 1st of the month in which it falls due instead of from the actual date on which it accrues, and to say that Government have accepted the aforesaid recommendation of the Commission vide Item No.
These orders shall take effect from 11 1 1973 and shall companyer only Central Government employees in Classes 11, III and IV.
He joined the Ministry as such on 25 1 1985 in the pay scale of 425 15 500 EB 15 560 20 700 EB 25 800.
The Central Civil Services Revised Pay Rules, 1986 the Rules came into force on 1 1 1986.
The clarification at Serial No.
The sanction of the President is accordingly companyveyed hereby to the increment of employees being admitted from the 1 St of the month in which it would fall due under the operation of the general rules and orders regulating increments.
5 in the annexure appended to the Resolution No.
Gill challenged the action of the Government by way of an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi the Tribunal .
His claim for grant of annual increment in the revised pay scale was rejected by the Government.
The Tribunal by its judgment dated 13 4 1992 dismissed the application.
Points raised Clarifications No.
All those who earned the increment any time between 1 2 1986 to 31 12 1986 were given the increment in the revised scale.
Had the appellant joined in the month of February 1985 or thereafter he would have got the increment in the revised scale.
Cell dated 1 11 1973.
The existing pay scale for the post of Assistant Legal 425 800 was revised to 1640 60 2600 EB 75 2900 under the Rules with effect from 1 1 1986.
He joined on 4 3 1985 and was given his annual increment with effect from 1 3 1986 in the revised scale.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. Chander Bhan Gill Gill joined Central Government service on 25 1 1985.
We may numberice the necessary facts.
Gill was selected for appointment as Assistant Legal in the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.
The Government action based on the clarification dated 4 5 1987 has obviously worked to the detriment of the appellant.
He joined service on 4 3 1985 in the same pay scale.
