ARUN KUMAR YADAVversusCENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - A No. - 2665 of 2026

Arun Kumar Yadav
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus

Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad and 3
others                                                   .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Vagish Yadav, Vijay Shankar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : C.S.C., Om Prakash Mishra

Chief Justice's Court
            HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE
            HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.

1. Heard Shri Vagish Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri
Om Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated
06.11.2025, whereby Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench,
Allahabad (‘the Tribunal’) has dismissed the Original Application
(‘O.A.’) No. 1130 of 2017 filed by the petitioner denying to grant reliefs
claimed therein.

3. The O.A. was filed challenging an order dated 01.02.2017, whereby the
Competent Authority had rejected an application filed by the petitioner in
furtherance of an order dated 15.12.2016 passed by this Court in Writ-A
No. 41470 of 2009. Further relief was claimed before the Tribunal to
direct the respondents to re-fix petitioner’s grade pay of Rs. 1,900/-
instead of Rs. 1,800/- as per the First Schedule of revised pay band for the
post of Group ‘D’, upgraded Group ‘C’ and corresponding grade pay of
Rs. 1,900/- (pay band/scale 5,200-20,200).

4. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Labourer
under unskilled category, i.e. a Group ‘D’ post on 18.07.2002 at Army
Base Workshop, Allahabad. During his service tenure, he passed 10th
Examination from U.P. Board in the year 2005, whereafter he appeared
                                                      WRIA No. 2665 of 2026
                                 2


for the Trade Test for promotion on 21.11.2005 and, having cleared the
same, he was promoted as a Fitter (Mate) under semi-skilled category
(Group ‘D’) w.e.f. 29.12.2005.

5. The claim of the petitioner was based upon the recommendations of
Sixth Central Pay Commission (‘Sixth C.P.C.’) introduced by
Government of India w.e.f. 01.01.2006, whereby it was provided that all
employees belonging to Group ‘D’, who possess the prescribed
qualification for the entry level in Group ‘C’, would be placed in Group
‘C’ running pay band w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and since the petitioner had been
promoted to the post of Fitter (Mate) (Semi Skilled Category under Group
‘D’) in the year 2005, he was entitled for Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/-
corresponding to pay scale 5200-20200 applicable for entry level in
Group ‘C’ but the same was not granted to him. He approached the
Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 496 of 2009, which was dismissed on the
ground that he had not raised his grievances before the Authority. Then,
he filed Writ-A No. 41470 of 2009, which was disposed of by order dated
15.12.2016 permitting him to move appropriate application before the
respondents, who were directed to pass appropriate orders thereon.

6. The Department rejected the application on the ground that since pay of
the petitioner had been fixed upward in PB-1 (Rs. 5200-20200) at the rate
of Rs. 5,530/- plus Grade Pay of Rs. 1,800/- as applicable for the post of
Fitter (Mate) being semi skilled category, Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/- in the
same pay band which is applicable for skilled category, would not be
admissible to the petitioner. On challenge laid to the order dated
01.12.2017 before the Tribunal, no error therein has been found by the
Tribunal.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made submissions that since
Clause 2.2.9 contained in Sixth C.P.C. Report clearly provides that the
employees belonging to Group ‘D’ who possess the prescribed
                                                              WRIA No. 2665 of 2026
                                  3


qualifications for entry level in Group ‘C’ will be placed in the Group ‘C’
running pay band straightaway w.e.f. 01.01.2006, denial on the part of the
respondents and also rejection of petitioner’s claim by the Tribunal
without carefully perusing the said clause is unsustainable. It is further
contended that neither the Department nor the Tribunal has appropriately
considered the case of upgradation of the petitioner from one pay band to
another based upon the said recommendation and, therefore, the order of
the Tribunal should be set aside and the petitioner should be granted relief
as claimed.

8. Submissions made have been opposed by the learned counsel for the
respondents by referring to the stand taken in counter affidavit filed
before the Tribunal and it is contended that as per the recommendations of
Sixth C.P.C., introduced w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the pay scale of Fitter (Mate)
(semi skilled category) of Rs. 2,650-4,000/- was revised to Rs. 4,440-
7,440/- plus Grade Pay of Rs. 1,650/- and petitioner’s grade pay was
further upgraded/revised to Rs. 1,800/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 based upon his
qualification and as per the recommendations. It is further contended that
Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/- is applicable only to the skilled category and Rs.
1,800/- to semi skilled category and since the petitioner is serving under
semi skilled category, his grade pay was rightly fixed as Rs. 1,800/-.

9. We have considered the submissions made and perused the material
available on record.

10. Since Clause 2.2.9 of the recommendations made by Sixth C.P.C. has
been referred, it is necessary to reproduce it. The same reads as under:-

       “2.2.9 The posts of Secretary to Government of India/equivalent and
       Cabinet Secretary / equivalent are proposed to be kept in distinct pay
       bands. While a separate running pay band, designated as -1S scale, is
       being recommended for posts belonging to Group 'D', however, the
       same shall not be counted for any purpose as no future recruitment is to
       be made in this grade and all the present employees belonging to
                                                               WRIA No. 2665 of 2026
                                   4


       Group 'D' who possess the prescribed qualifications for entry level
       in Group 'C', will be placed in the Group 'C' running pay band
       straight away with effect from 1-1-2006. Other Group 'D'
       employees, who do not possess the prescribed qualifications, are to
       be retrained and thereafter upgraded and placed in the Group 'C'
       running pay band. Till such time they are retrained and are
       redeployed, they will be placed in the-1S scale. The Commission
       clarifies that-1S pay scale is not a regular or a permanent pay scale.
       Insofar as the present employees are concerned, the scale will operate
       only till the time all the existing Group 'D' staff is placed in the Group
       'C' running pay band. The exact mechanism for placing Group 'D’ staff
       in the revised Group 'C' running pay band has been discussed in detail in
       Chapter 3.7 relating to Group D staff. Group 'D' employees who are not
       placed in the Group 'C' pay band straightaway will be given the band
       after their retraining without any loss of seniority vis a vis those in
       Group 'D' who possessed higher qualifications, redeployed and were
       placed in the Group 'C' running pay band with effect from 1-1-2006.
       The retraining will also emphasize the multi-skilling of these employees
       so that one single employee is able to perform multiple jobs that hitherto
       were being done by many employees. This will ensure that higher scale
       of pay does not place any additional pecuniary burden on the
       Government. Ansari Report on restructuring of Group D posts in
       Railways also recommends such a mechanism where many Group D
       posts are to be upgraded with higher skills so that the number of
       employees required to do the job gets reduced.”

11. The language used in Clause 2.2.9 is being apparently misunderstood
by the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a Labourer
(unskilled category) on a Group ‘D’ post in the year 2002 and, based upon
his qualification of High School which he acquired in the year 2005, he
was promoted as Fitter (Mate) under semi skilled category (Group ‘D’)
w.e.f. 29.12.2005. He was never appointed as or promoted to a skilled
category labourer and, therefore, Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/- applicable for
skilled category labourer could not be made applicable to him.

12. In so far as the revision/upgradation of grade pay in PB-1, as claimed
by the petitioner is concerned, the respondents have taken a clear stand
that pay scale of Fitter (Mate) (semi skilled category) was revised and
grade pay was fixed as Rs. 1,650/-. The Group ‘D’ employees, who were
                                                           WRIA No. 2665 of 2026
                               5


having minimum qualifications as per the recommendations made by the
Commission for entry level into PB-1, the grade pay was revised to Rs.
1,800/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 which the petitioner is being paid. As to how
there would be further revision from Rs. 1,800/- to Rs. 1,900/- is not
understandable. There is no provision for 'revision over revision' or
'upgradation over upgradation' and, apparently, benefits as per the
recommendations of Sixth C.P.C. were admissible only once and based
upon the qualifications which the concerned employee possessed with as
on the date when the said recommendations had come into force, i.e. on
01.01.2006.

13. In view of the above, if the reasoning recorded by the respondents in
the order dated 01.12.2017 rejecting the claim of the petitioner is looked
at, it is found that the respondents have thoroughly analyzed the working
status of the petitioner vis-a-vis corresponding pay band/grade pay and its
revision/upgradation based upon the recommendations of Sixth P.C. They
have found that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, he was 8th
pass, during his service he passed High School Examination in the year
2005, cleared the trade test in 2005, he was promoted as Fitter (Mate)
under semi skilled category on 29.12.2005 and his earlier pay scale of Rs.
2,650-4,000/- (Fifth Pay Commission) was revised as Rs. 4,440-7,440/-
with Grade Pay of Rs. 1,650/- attached to the post of semi skilled
category.

14. The respondents further observed that based upon the Sixth Pay
C.P.C. Report (Revised Pay Rules, 2008), pay of Group ‘D’ employees
possessing revised minimum qualification prescribed for entry in PB-1
was to be fixed w.e.f. 01.01.2006 in PB-1 with Grade Pay of Rs. 1,800/-,
which was accordingly fixed in the case of the petitioner also and,
therefore, the claim of the petitioner for further upgradation and grant of
Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/-, which is applicable for the skilled category
which the petitioner does not belong to, is not tenable.
                                                                                            WRIA No. 2665 of 2026
                                                                   6


                                    15. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that
                                    the respondents have not only correctly interpreted the recommendations
                                    of Sixth C.P.C. but also rightly applied the same in the case of the
                                    petitioner and have rightly denied him the relief qua further
                                    fixation/revision/upgradation to Grade Pay of Rs. 1,900/-. We also do not
                                    find any error in the order of the Tribunal, which is also based upon the
                                    correct appreciation of material available on record.

                                    16. Consequently, there is no merit in the writ petition. The same is,
                                    therefore, dismissed.



                                                                 (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
                                    February 23, 2026
                                    AKShukla/-




Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad