CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Union of India (UOI) vs Shri R.K. Chopra

Delhi High Court · Decided on 4 August 2008 · Citation: (2009) 1 ILR Delhi 613

HON’BLE JUDGES
Madan B. Lokur, J · J.R. Midha, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 — Rule 7
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1899 of 2007
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 354 words

Madan B. Lokur, J.—The Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 4th August, 2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA No. 29/2006.

2.

The question involved in this case is rather narrow. The Respondent was placed under suspension and during the period of his suspension the 5th Central Pay Commission Report was implemented. The question for consideration is whether the subsistence allowance due to the Petitioner would increase as a result of the implementation of the 5th Central Pay Commission Report or not.

3.

By the impugned order, the Tribunal has answered the question in favour of the Respondent and enhanced the subsistence allowance to the Respondent on the basis of the upward revision in the pay-scale. The Tribunal relied upon a decision of a larger bench of the Tribunal in the case of J.S. Kharat v. Union of India and Ors. 2002 fbj 169. We may note that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of J.S. Kharat has been accepted by the Union of India.

4.

We may also note that a similar issue had arisen before this Court in Commissioner of Police v. Randhir Singh WP (C) No. 713/2008 decided on 29th January, 2008. A Division Bench of this Court came to the conclusion that on an interpretation Rule 7 Note 3 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 1977, the delinquent officer would be entitled to enhanced subsistence allowance. In Randhir Singh, the delinquent officer was placed under suspension on 28th August, 1995 and he was dismissed from service on 10th August, 2006. The question in that case was also whether, as a result of the upward revision of pay-scales by the acceptance of the Report of the 5th Central Pay Commission, the delinquent officer would be entitled to enhanced subsistence allowance. Relying upon the decision in J.S. Kharat, with which the Division Bench did not find any infirmity, it was held that a delinquent officer was entitled to enhanced subsistence allowance.

5.

Applying the view laid down by this Court in Randhir Singh, we find no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.