Dear Comrades,
Despite our request not to file
any SLP on the High Court Karnataka decision on fixation of pay of PO & RMS
accountants on promotion, the Department has filed SLP in the Supreme Court as
per the opinion of the Ministry of Finance. Now the supreme court has dismissed
the SLP. Now the Department has no option except implement the Karnataka CAT
and High Court decision. The Department should come forward to implement the
decision to all the similarly situated persons.
Kudos to Karnataka Comrades.
The Supreme Court has fined Rs.
50000/- to Department
A remarkable and marvelous
decision.
ITEM NO.9 COURT
NO.5 SECTION IVA
S U P R E M E C O U R
T O F
I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC
10080/2012
(From the judgement and order dated 18/11/2010 in WP
No.7593/2003, of The HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE)
CHIEF POST MASTER GEN.KARNATAKA CIR.& ORS Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
S. MOHAN KUMAR Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)
Date: 05/07/2012
This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. R.P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv.
Ms. B Sunita Rao, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.(Not
present)
For Respondent(s)
UPON
hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
This petition filed for setting
aside order dated 18.11.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High
Court is accompanied by an application for condonation of 445 days delay.
We
have heard Shri. R. P. Bhatt, learned senior counsel representing the
petitioners and carefully perused the averments contained in the application filed under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act and are convinced that there is no valid ground to accept
the explanation offered by the petitioners for delayed filing of the special leave
petition.
We are further of the view that the
Bangalore Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal did not commit any error
by quashing the action taken by the petitioners to re-fix the respondent's pay
on the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission and the High Court rightly declined
to entertain the petitioners' challenge to the order of the Tribunal.
Learned senior counsel appearing for
the petitioners could not put forward any tangible argument to support
re-fixation of the respondent's pay in the light of the recommendations of the
Vth Pay Commission. Therefore, we do not find any valid ground to interfere
with the impugned order.
The special leave petition is
accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and also on merits.
For filing a frivolous petition like the
present one, the petitioners are saddled with costs of rupees fifty thousand
which shall be deposited by them with the Supreme Court Legal Services
Committee within a period of eight weeks from today. It will be open to the
Central Government to recover the amount of costs from the officers responsible
for taking wholly arbitrary and unjustified action for re-fixing the
respondent's pay.
(Parveen
Kr.Chawla)
Court Master (Phoolan Wati Arora)
Court Master
AIPEU P3 CHQ
