Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers (2016=100) – October, 2020
The All-India Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers (CPI-IW) for October, 2020 increased by 1.4 points and stood at 119.5 (one hundred nineteen and point five). On 1-month percentage change, it increased by (+) 1.19 per cent between September and October, 2020 compared to (+) 0.93 per cent increase between corresponding months of previous year.
The maximum upward pressure in current index came from Food & Beverages group contributing (+) 1.29 percentage points to the total change. At item level, Arhar Dal, Poultry (Chicken), Eggs (Hen), Goat Meat, Mustard Oil, Sunflower Oil, Brinjal, Cabbage, Carrot, Cauliflower, Chillies Green, Gourd, Lady Finger, Onion, Peas, Potato, Electricity Domestic, Doctor’s Fee, Bus Fare, etc. are responsible for the increase in index. However, this increase was checked by Wheat, Fish Fresh, Tomato, Apple, etc., putting downward pressure on the index.
At centre level, Doom-Dooma Tinsukia, Patna and Ramgarh recorded the maximum increase of 4 points each. Among others, 3 points increase was observed in 9 centres, 2 points in 24 centres and 1 point in 33 centres. Rest of 19 centres’ indices remained stationary.
Year-on-year inflation based on all-items stood at 5.91 per cent for October, 2020 as compared to 5.62 per cent for the previous month and 7.62 per cent during the corresponding month of the previous year. Similarly, Food inflation stood at 8.21 per cent against 7.51 per cent of the previous month and 8.60 per cent during the corresponding month a year ago.
All-India CPI for Industrial Workers (2016=100) for October, 2020 increased to 119.5 points compared to 118.1 points for September, 2020.
In percentage terms, it rose by 1.19% w.r.t. previous month mainly due to Food group items having a share of 39.17% in the total weight which recorded a rise of 76% between these two months. During the period, increase in prices of food items viz. Arhar Dal, Poultry Chicken, Goat Meat, Egg, Mustard Oil, Onion, Potato, Brinjal, Peas, Doctor’s Fee, Bus Fare, etc., had greater impact.
Year-on-year inflation based on all-items stood at 5.91 per cent for October, 2020 compared to 5.62 per cent for September, 2020 and 7.62 per cent during the corresponding month of the previous year. Similarly, Food inflation stood at 8.21 per cent against 7.51 per cent of the previous month and 8.60 per cent during the corresponding month a year ago.
The next issue of CPI-IW for the month of November, 2020 will be released on Thursday 31st December, 2020. The same will also be available on the office website www.labourbureaunew.gov.in.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (BHARAT SARKAR)
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAIL MANTRALAYA)
(RAILWAY BOARD)
No. E(G) 2000 QR 1- 23
New Delhi, dated 24 .11. 2020
The General Manager/Director General
All Indian Railways/Production Units/ROSO-Lucknow
(As per Standard mailing list)
Sub : Retention of Railway quarter on transfer, deputation, retirement etc.
The instructions contained in Board’s letter of even number dated 01.06.2001 (RBE No. 100/2001) regarding retention of Railway quarter on transfer, deputation, retirement etc. have been reviewed in Ministry of Railways and full Board have decided to partially modify provisions mentioned in para (a) and para 5.1 of the above-mentioned instructions as under.
1. Permanent Transfer
(a) (i) A Railway employee on transfer from one station to another which necessitates change of residence, may be permitted to retain the railway accommodation at the former station of posting for a period of two months on payment of normal licence fee plus six months on payment of double licence fee.
(ii) Further extension beyond the aforesaid period may be granted on educational ground only as mentioned below:
To cover the current academic session (i.e. end of the academic/scholastic session) plus 15 days. The end of academic/scholastic session shall, in this case, mean “last paper of annual examination.
When the ward of the railway employee is studying in Class 9th or Class 11th, retention of railway accommodation may be allowed on educational ground to cover the current academic session and also the next academic session (examination) of the ward, till end of the academic/scholastic session of class 10th or h respectively plus 15 days.
(iii) Beyond the permitted/permissible limits, however, no further extension will be allowed on any ground whatsoever. Therefore, no request or representation on this score shall be entertained. For all occupations beyond the permitted period, immediate action should be taken to cancel the allotment, declare the occupation as unauthorised and initiate eviction proceedings, charging damage rent for the over-stay.
5. Retirement
5.1 Railway employees on retirement, including voluntary retirees and those retired compulsorily, may be permitted to retain non-earmarked Railway accommodation for a period of 4 months on payment of normal rent/flat rate of licence fee and the next 4 months on payment of special fee, i.e. double the normal rent or double the flat rate of licence fee. This is also applicable to audit staff doing Railway audit work . The cases of retirement on medical invalidation grounds are also to be treated at par with normal retirement .
2. Other provisions mentioned in Board’s letter No. E(G) 2000 QR 1-23 dated 01.06.2001 (RBE No. 100/2001) will remain unchanged.
3. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of railways.
4. Please acknowledge receipt.
(Anita Gautam)
Director Establishment (Genl.)
Railway Board
Nationwide Protest on Nov 26th, 2020 – DOPT Instruction – Pay and allowances is not admissible to an employee incase of absence
MOST IMMEDIATE
OUT TODAY
No.45018/1/2017-Vig.
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
North Block, New Delhi,
Dated the 25th November, 2020
Subject : Proposed nationwide protest by Confederation of Central Government Employees a& Workers on November 26th, 2020 -Instructions under CCS (Conduct Rules), 1964 – Regarding.
It has been brought to the notice of the Government that Confederation of Central Government Employees & Workers has decided to observe nationwide strike on 26th November, 2020 in order to demand related to pay, pension and service matters.
2. The instructions issued by the Department of Personnel and Training prohibit the Government servants from participating in any form of strike including mass casual leave, go slow etc. or any action that abet any form of strike/protest in violation of Rule 7 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. Besides, in accordance with the proviso to Rule 17(I) of the Fundamental Rules, pay and allowances is not admissible to an employee for his absence from duty without any authority. As to the concomitant rights of an Association after it is formed, they cannot be different from the rights which can be claimed by the individual members of which the Association is composed. It follows that the right to form an Association does not include any guaranteed right to strike/protest. There is no statutory provision empowering the employees to go on strike. The Supreme Court has also agreed in several judgments that going on a strike is a grave misconduct under the Conduct Rules and that misconduct by the Government employees is required to be dealt with in accordance with law. Any employee going on strike in any form would face the consequences which, besides deduction of wages, may also include appropriate disciplinary action. Kind attention of all employees of this Department is also drawn to this Department’s 0.M. No.33012/1/(s)/2008-Estt.(B) dated 12.9.2008, on the subject for strict compliance (enclosed as Annexure-A).
3. All officers are requested that the above instructions may be brought to the notice of the employees working under their control. All officers are also requested not to sanction Casual Leave or any other kind of leave to the officers and employees, if applied for, during the period of proposed strike, and ensure that the willing employees are allowed hindrance free entry into the office premises.
4. In case employees go on strike, all Divisional Heads are requested to forward a report indicating the number and details of employees, who are absent from duty on the day of strike, i.e., 26.11.2020.
Indian Railway launches digitised online Human Resource Management System (HRMS)
HRMS will impact over 27 lakh families of serving as well as retired employees.
Move to improve efficiency and productivity of Railway system.
HRMS will increase accountability and transparency in the working of Railways
HRMS is a step towards realizing the vision of Hon’ble Prime Minister to transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy.
HRMS will have a big impact on the functioning of all the employees and will make them more tech savvy.
Indian Railway has launched completely digitized online Human Resource Management System (HRMS). Human Resource Management System (HRMS) is a high thrust project for Indian Railways to leverage improved productivity & employee satisfaction. It is a move to improve efficiency and productivity of Railway system and a step towards realizing the vision of Hon’ble Prime Minister to transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy. HRMS is expected to create a big impact on the functioning of all the employees and will make them more tech savvy.
Shri Vinod Kumar Yadav, Chairman & CEO, Railway Board has launched following modules of HRMS & User depot useful for railway employees and pensioners today via video conferencing.
Employee Self Service (ESS) module enables railway employees to interact with various modules of HRMS including communication regarding change of data.
Provident Fund (PF) Advance module enables Railway employees to check their PF balance and apply for PF advance online. Advance processing will be online and employees will also be able to see the status of their PF application online.
Settlement module digitizes the entire settlement process of retiring employees. Employees can fill their settlement / pension booklet online. Service details are fetched online and pension is processed online completely. This will eliminate use of paper and it also facilitates monitoring for timely processing of settlement dues of retiring employees.
Prior to these modules, Indian Railways has already launched other modules of HRMS like Employee Master module which stores all basic information details of Railway employee, Electronic Service Record module replacing physical Service Records storing service records of employees in digital format, Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) module digitizing the complete process of writing annual peeformance Appraisal of all 12 lakh non gazetted Railway employees, Electronic Pass module replacing the physical paper pass, Office Order Module meant both for the issue of office Orders and updation of data on joining of new employees, promotion, transfer of employees and retirement of employees in HRMS database.
Railway is not planning to reduce the overtime and travel allowance – PIB Fact Check
There are some unconfirmed news spreading in some of the news articles that Indian Railways is planning to cut overtime and travel allowances for 14 lakh Railway employees. As per the report allowances for overtime duty including Travel Allowance will be deducted 50 per cent.
Today, PIBFACTCHECK confirmed in the official twitter page that there is no plan to reduce the overtime and travel allowance to Railway Employees
Tweet from PIBFactCheck
It is being claimed in some news articles that #IndianRailways is planning to reduce the overtime and travel allowance of 13 lakh employees by 50 per cent.
#PIBFactCheck: This claim is #Fake. @RailMinIndia has not proposed to reduce the rates of overtime and travel allowance.
It is being claimed in some news articles that #IndianRailways is planning to reduce the overtime and travel allowance of 13 lakh employees by 50 per cent.#PIBFactCheck: This claim is #Fake. @RailMinIndia has not proposed to reduce the rates of overtime and travel allowance. pic.twitter.com/P4KybXEcJ0
No.12(2)/2020/E.II.A
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure
North Block, New Delhi
Dated 25th November, 2020
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject :- Clarification regarding queries being received in respect of Special Cash Package equivalent in lieu of Leave Travel Concession Fare for Central Government Employees during the block 2018-21 (FAQ No.3)
The undersigned is directed to say that this Department has been receiving a number of queries relating to Special Package equivalent in lieu of Leave Travel Concession Fare for Central Government Employees during the block 2018-21 announced by the Government on 12th October, 2020. Two sets of frequently asked questions have already been clarified vide this Department’s OM of even no. dated 20th October, 2020 and 10th November, 2020 are available on this Department’s website viz. doe.gov.in.
2. A further set of frequently asked questions have been clarified and is attached herewith at Annexure below.
3. This issues with the approval of Secretary (Exp.).
All Ministries/Departments of the Government of India
An employee wishes to avail the special cash package without opting for leave encashment. As per records he has sufficient EL for encashment purpose. Whether an employee can only avail LTC fare without claiming Leave encashment even though he has not exhausted the prescribed limit for leave encashment for LTC.
An employee can avail this scheme utilizing the applicable LTC fare without opting for leave encashment. Leave encashment is optional.
2
If an employee opts for only deemed LTC fare without the leave encashment and spends less than three times of the deemed fare as has been prescribed to claim reimbursement of the deemed LTC fare, how the reimbursement would be calculated.
The reimbursement in this case would be on pro-rata basis. Since in order to claim the applicable deemed fare, an employee is required to spend three times of the deemed LTC fare, the reimbursement in the case of expenditure less than the prescribed three times would be l/3rd of the actual expenditure. An illustration of calculation is given at annexure attached below.
3
Can an employee avail leave encashment for less than 10 days.
The number of days of Leave encashment for LTC (10 days or less than 10 days) is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of LTC rules.
4
Will payment of premium of already existing insurance policies be covered under this scheme?
The special cash package envisages just of purchase of goods and services with GST of 12% and above made during the period between 12.10.2020 and 31.03.2021. Payment of premium of existing insurance policies does not fall under this category. However, payment of premium for insurance policies purchased during the period between 12.10.2020 and 31.03.2021 is eligible for reimbursement under the scheme.
5
If an employee buys a car or any other items or services, whether it is mandatory to submit original bills to DDO as the same may be required for claim the warranty and ownership of the item/service.
No, self attested photocopy would suffice. However, the original bills may be produces on demand for information.
6
The vouchers/bills to be submitted to avail this scheme on or before the 31st March 2021. Employees who are due to superannuate (say) on the 31st December 2020, be required to submit the vouchers/bills before his superannuation i.e. before the 31st December 2020.
Vouchers/bills should be submitted and settled before the date of superannuation in this case.
Annexure
Example (1) (without Leave Encashment)
Claiming for family of 4 eligible for economy class air travel.
Fare Value : Rs.20,000 x 4 = Rs.80,000
Amount to be spent for full cash benefit = Rs.80,000 x 3* = Rs.2,40,000
* 3 times of notional airfare (80,000 x 3=2,40,000)
Cash benefit = Amount Spent X deemed LTC (80,000 in this case) / Amount to be spent for full cash benefit
Thus, if an employee spends say Rs.2,40,000 or above, he will be allowed cash amount of Rs.80,000. However, if the employee spends less than Rs.2,40,000, say 1,80,000 then he may be allowed cash amount in the same proportion as illustrated above which comes out Rs.60,000 in this case.
[1.80,000 x 80,000 / 2,40,000 = 60,000]
Example (2) (without Leave Encashment)
Claiming for family of 4 eligible for Train travel.
Fare Value : Rs.6,000 x 4 = Rs.24,000
Amount to be spent for full cash benefit = Rs.24,000 x 3* = Rs.72,000
Cash benefit = Amount Spent X deemed LTC Fare (24,000 in this case) /Amount to be spent for full cash benefit
* 3 times of notional train fare (24,000 x 3=72,000)
Thus, if an employee spends Rs.72,000 or above, he will be allowed cash amount of Rs.24,000. However, if the employee spends less than Rs.72,000 say 48,000 then he may be allowed cash amount in the same proportion as illustrated above which comes out Rs.16,000 in this case.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(Railway Board)
S.No. PC-VII/161
No. PC-V/2018/MACP/1(SM)
RBE No. 99/2020
New Delhi, dated: 24.11.2020
The General Manager (P)
All Indian Railways and PUs,
(As per mailing list)
Sub :– Grant of financial upgradation under MACPS to Station Masters.
Reference from Federation (NFIR and AIRF) and a few Railways have been received for ignoring the promotion/upgradation from ASM (GP 2800) to SM (GP 4200) for grant of financial upgradation under MACPS to those employees who have further been absorbed in other cadres by way of selection on lateral induction or due to medical de-categorisation. The matter has been examined in consultation with Finance Directorate and it has been decided that the benefit of Board’s letter dated 25.02.2020 (RBE No. 26/2020) would also be extended to such employees who have progressed to other cadres by way of lateral induction/selection or due to medical de-categorization and would be granted financial upgradation under MACPS by ignoring their promotion/financial upgradation from ASM (GP 2800) to SM (GP 4200) irrespective of their progression in other cadres.
2. The benefit of the financial upgradation in such cases would accrue from 16.02.2018 onwards, even if financial upgradation happens to become due before 16.02.2018 as a consequence of ignoring the promotion from ASM to SM.
3, This issues with the concurrence of Finance Directorate of Ministry of Railways.
4. Hindi version is enclosed.
(Sudha A. Kujur)
Dy Director/Pay Commission
Railway Board
Record the PPO number in all the passbooks of the pensioners / family pensioners – CPAO
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE
CENTRAL PENSION ACCOUNTING OFFICE
TRIKOOT-II, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE
110066 / NEW DELHI – 110066
Subject:- Regarding marking of PPO number in the bank passbook of Pensioners/Family Pensioners.
Attention is invited to this office OM No. CPAO/Tech/Clarification /P&PW/2014-15/426-497 dated-17.09.2014, OM No. CPAO/IT&Tech /Bank Performance/37.Vol-III(A)/ 2019/18 dated 23.04.2019 and OM No. CPAO/IT&Tech/Bank Performance/37.Vol-III(A)/ 2019/144 dated- 13.11.2019 wherein all the Heads of CPPCs and Govt. Business Deptts. were requested to instruct all their bank branches dealing with pension payments to record the PPO number in the passbooks of the pensioners/family pensioners issued by them.
2. Despite clear instruction, this office has received representations from many pensioners’ and Pensioner’s Associations that the bank branches are not recording the PPO number in the passbook of the pensioners/family pensioners: which leads to problems for transfer of pension account from one bank to another bank or from one bank branch to another bank branch.
3. Therefore, Heads of all CPPCs and Govt. Business Departments are once again requested to instruct all their bank branches dealing with the pension payments to record the PPO number in all the passbooks of the pensioners/family pensioners issued by them.
This issues with the approval of Chief Controller (Pension).
(Md. Shahid Kamal Ansari)
(Dy. Controller of Accounts)
Revision of Flat Rate of License Fee for GPRA Effective from July 2020 – PCDA
Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Western Command), Chandigarh-160009 Tel. No.: 0172-22741611 Ext. (231) E-mail: [email protected]
No.E/II/161/R&A
Date: 18/11/2020
To,
All AO GEs /AAO BSOs
under PCDA(WC)
Sub: Revision of flat rate of license fee for General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) throughout the country.
One of the AOGEs has raised an issue regarding recovery of flat rate of license fee from Service officers/Defence civilians occupying the accommodation of MES/Defence pool accommodation. An examination of the issue has revealed that notifications for applicability of flat rates of license fee are being issued from time to time by GOI, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs Directorate of Estates.
Recent revision of flat rate of license fee for General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) for all ministries/Departments has been notified by GOI, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Directorate of Estates vide letter No. 18011/2/2015-Pol. III dated 29.06.2020 (copy enclosed) and it is effective from 1 July, 2020.
In view of the above, it may be ensured at your end that the latest revision as well as previous revisions issued by GOI, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs Directorate of Estates have been taken into account to recover the revised license fee from occupants for whom the residential accommodation available in General Pool and also in departmental pools of Ministries/Departments of the Government of India in respect of Defence Civilians.
A confirmation in this regard may be furnished by 30/11/2020.
Grant of notional increment / re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Madras High Court Order
F. No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad.IIA
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
North Block, New Delhi,
Dated the 20th November , 2020.
To
All Pr. Chief Commissioners/ Chief
Commissioners/Director General under CBIC.
Subject: Miscellaneous Representations and Court Cases on the issue of grant of notional increment/re-fixation of pensionary benefits as per Hon’ble Madras High Court Order in WP No .15732/2017 in the case of Sh. P. Ayyamperumal – regarding.
Sir/Madam,
I am directed to refer to CBIC’s letter of even number dated 18.10.2019 (copy enclosed) on the subject mentioned above whereby you have been informed that the competent authority in consultation with Department of personnel and training and Department of Legal Affairs has decided to implement the Order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the matter of WP No. 15732/2017, P. Ayyamperumal Vs. Union of India, in personam and not in rem and, therefore, it is not required to be quoted as precedent in future.
2. It is noted that a number of representations from similarly placed retired officers are being received in the Board. Several court cases in this regard have also been filed at various fora by the retired officers. Therefore, all the cadre controlling authorities were requested, vide letter dated 18.10.2019 referred above, that all the pending/future court cases on the similar issue should be defended/dealt with adequately on the lines as suggested by DoP&T. However, despite this, most of the cadre controlling authorities are forwarding the court cases/representations filed by the similarly placed officers to the Board for providing para-wise comments/necessary action, contrary to the instructions issued vide letter of even number 18.10.2019.
3. In view of above, all the Cadre Controlling Authorities are again requested to defend all the court cases and dispose all the representations on the issue of notional increment at their end and also defend all the court cases adequately on the following grounds:
I. As per Rule 10 of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, the date of annual increment is fixed uniformly as 1st July of every year. Employees completing six months and above in the revised pay structure as on 1st July are eligible for the next increment. The increment could not be granted to the officer retiring on 30th June, as he was not in service on 1st July.
II. DoP&T have made the following observation vide their O.M. dated 16.08.2019 and 11.11.2019:-
i. On the issue of date of retirement of government servant, FR 56(a) which inter- alia provides as under may be referred:
Except as otherwise provided in this rule, every government servant shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of sixty years:
Provided that a Government servant whose date of birth is the first of a month shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the preceding month on attaining the age of sixty years.
ii. Further, so far as P. Ayyamperumal case is concerned, which has been referred in the Writ Petitions, it is stated that
a. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in P. Ayyamperumal case is in personam and is contrary to the personnel policy of Government of India.
b. Further, case of M. Balasubramaniam referred by the Hon’ble High Court in its judgment in P. Ayyamperumal case is related to the Fundamental Rules of Tamil Nadu Government whereas P Ayaamperumal case relates to Central Government Rules. As per provisions under Tamil Nadu Fundamental rules 26(a), the annual increments of the Govt. Servants are regulated in four quarters viz. 1st January, 1st April, 1st July and 1st October. And for the Central Govt, it is done annually on 1st July only.
c. While adjudicating the issue whether a government servant who retires on the last day of the preceding month and whose annual increment falls due on the first of the succeeding month is entitled for sanction of annual increment for the purpose of pension and gratuity, Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in the year 2005 in C. Subba Rao case had inter alia observed the following:
In support of the above observations, the Division Bench also placed reliance on Banerjee case (supra). We are afraid, the Division Bench was not correct in coming to the conclusion that being a reward for unblemished past service, Government servant retiring on the last day of the month would also be entitled for increment even after such increment is due after retirement. We have already made reference to all Rules governing the situation. There is no warrant to come to such conclusion. Increment is given (See Article 43 of CS Regulations) as a periodical rise to a Government employee for the good behavior in the service. Such increment is possible only when the appointment is “Progressive Appointment” and it is not a universal rule. Further, as per Rule 14 of the Pension Rules, a person is entitled for pay, increment and other allowances only when he is entitled to receive pay from out of Consolidated Fund of India and continues to be in Government service. A person who retires on the last working day would not be entitled for any increment falling due on the next day and payable next day thereafter (See Article 151 of CS Regulations), because he would not answer the tests in these Rules. Reliance placed on Banerjee case (supra) is also in our considered opinion not correct because, as observed by us, Banerjee case (supra) does not deal with increment, but deals with enhancement of DA by the Central Government to pensioners. Therefore, we are not able to accept the view taken by the Division Bench. We accordingly, overrule the judgment in Malakondalah case (supra).’
Hence, there is another High Court judgment which lays contrary principles on this issue.
iii. In addition, the following observation of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while giving its judgment dated 23.10.2018 in the case of UOI and others vs. G.C. Yadav are also noteworthy :
‘So far as the rejection of the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India is concerned, the same was by a summary order, and while dismissing the SLP preferred by the Union of India, the Supreme Court observed that it was not inclined to interfere with the impugned Judgment and order passed by the High Court of judicature at Madras on the facts of that case. The Supreme Court did not consider, and did not put its seal of approval on the legal principle involved in P. Ayyamperumal (supra). ‘
iv. That the Hyderabad Bench of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal had dismissed the OA Nos. 331/2019 and 332/2019 praying for the same relief by the applicant., vide its order dated 04.06.2019.
v. That Hon’ble CAT Madras Bench, subsequent to the judgement of Hon’ble High court of madras in P.Ayyamperumal case, vide its Orders dated 19.03.2019 in O.A. 310/00309/2019 and O.A. No. 310/00312/2019 and Order dated 27.03.2019 in O.A. No. 310/00026/2019 has dismissed the similar requests related with notional increment for pensionary benefits.
vi. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 29.03 .2019, while dismissing the SLP (C) Dy. No . 6468/2019 filed by D/o Telecommunications against the judgment dated 03.05.2017 of Hon’ble High Court, Lucknow Bench in WP No. 484/2010 in the matter of UoI & Ors. vs Sakha Ram Tripathy & Ors., has inter-alia observed the following:
“There is delay of 566 days in filing the special leave petition . We do not see any reason to condone the delay. The Special leave petition is dismissed on delay, keeping all the questions of law open. “
III. As far as the case of P. Ayyamperumal is concerned, it is informed that after rejection of SLP filed by Union of India in Hon’ble Apex Court, a review petition against the order dated 23.07 .2018 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Ayyamperumal was filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 08.08.2019 dismissed the instant review petition. Since the apex court dismissed the review petition of the department, the competent authority decided to implement the Order dated 15.09.2017 of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in WP No. 15732/2017, directing to grant one notional increment to petitioner retiring on 30th June for the purpose of pensionary benefits in personam for petitioner only to avoid the contempt proceedings as indicated in the said letter as referred to in para I above.
IV. Department of Legal Affairs, which was also consulted, while tendering advice in the matter of P. Ayyamperumal, has cited the case of Kunhayammed and others vs State of Kerala (2000) 6 SCC 359, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has concluded the following propositions :-
“An order refusing special leave to appeal may be a non- speaking order or a speaking one. In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. An order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the order under challenge. All that it means is that the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretion so as to allow the appeal being filed.
If the order refusing leave to appeal is a speaking order, i.e. gives reasons for refitsing the grant of leave, then the order has two implications. Firstly, the statement of law contained in the order is a declaration of law by the Supreme Court within the meaning of Article 141 of the Constitution. Secondly, other than the declaration of law, whatever is stated in the order are the findings recorded by the Supreme Court which would bind the parties thereto and also the court, tribunal or authority in any proceedings subsequent thereto by way of judicial discipline, the Supreme Court being the apex court of the country. But, this does not amount to saying that the order of the court, tribunal or authority below has stood merged in the order of the Supreme Court rejecting special leave petition or that the order of the Supreme Court is the only order binding as res judicata in subsequent proceedings between the parties. “
V. Keeping in view the above, DOLA opined that “It is very clear that the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed in the matter of Sh. P. Ayyamperumal is in personam and not in m, therefore, the Administrative Department may implement the order in personam.”
VI. Referring to the above principles laid down in Kunhayamrned (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court subsequently in the case of Bhakra Beas Management Board v. Krishan Kumar Vij and Anr. (2010) 8 SCC 701, held as under:-
“Thus, according to the law laid down by the Bench of three learned Judges of this Court, it is clear that dismissal of a matter by this Court at the threshold, with non speaking order, would not fall in the category of binding precedent. Meaning thereby that the impugned order of the Division Bench can still be challenged on merits by the appellant Board. Thus, the earlier orders of the High Court and this Court passed in Raninder Singh Patpatias case, creates no bar from re-examining the matter on merits.”
VII. From the above, it is clear that doctrine of merger is not applicable to in limine dismissal of SLP by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and would not attract the provisions of Article 141 of the Constitution of India to the said order.
Notional increment on 1st July on retirement w.e.f. 30th June: Details of Court Cases with positive Result
Notional increment on 1st July on retirement w.e.f. 30th June ; Contempt of Court: BPS writes to Secretary, DOPT
4. In view of above, it is again requested that all the pending/future court cases/representation on the similar issue should be defended/dealt with adequately on the above lines on behalf of all the respondents in terms of Board’s instruction issued vide letter F.No. C-18012/6/2013-Ad.IIB dated 09.05.2016. Reference to the Board should be made only if any additional policy issue is involved.
Encl: As above.
Yours faithfully,
(Rajendra Kumar)
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India
