http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: ALL INDIA DETENCE ESTATE EXPLOYEES ASSOCIATION.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       27/08/1998

BENCH: G T NANAVATI, S RAJENDRA BABU.

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: JUDGEMENT This  appeal  against  the  order  of  the   Central Administrative  Tribunal  deserves to be dismissed as we are of the opinion that  the  view  taken  by  the  Tribunal  is correct. The  only  question  raised  before the Tribunal was whether appellant nos.  2 & 3 were entitled to  the  benefit of  one  increment  under  Fundamental  Rule  22-C  on their promotion from the post of Technical Assistant to  the  post of office  Superintendent  Grade-II  in  1988.  The Tribunal held that appellant nos.  2 & 3 were governed by Rule  7  of the  Civilians in Defence Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1986 and not by the Fundamental Rule 22-C.  We are  also  of  the opinion that  the  appellant  nos.  2 & 3 being civilians in defence services the specific rule applied to them  and  not the general  provision  contained in FR 22-C.  Moreover, the two cadres of Technical Assistant and Office  Superintendent Grade-II  stood  merged  with effect from 1.1.86 and the two pay-scales attached to theirr cadres also merged with effect from the same date. Therefore, there could not have been any promotion within the cadre in the year 1988. That being  so, the  situation  of  qranting  benefit under Fundamental Rule 22-C did not arise at all because there were no promotion to a higher post or to a post carrying higher  duties.  As  the claim  of  the  appellants  was  misconceived it was rightly rejected by the Tribunal. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal with no order as to costs.