The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a petition filed by a group of ex-servicemen challenging the validity of the current pay-fixation rules, alleging that the existing framework unfairly penalised Army veterans who joined civil services after their retirement.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, however, allowed advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay to make a representation to the authorities concerned, which will decide on the issue as early as possible. If the petitioners, Baidya Nath Choudhary and five others, were dissatisfied, they could move the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) with the grievances, the Bench said.
The petitioners, all of whom served as Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBORs) before taking up roles in various government departments, including the Income Tax Department and the Food Corporation of India, said the current rules force them to start at the “minimum pay level” of their new posts.
They referred to Rule 8 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, and a subsequent Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) memorandum dated May 1, 2017.
This “mechanical fixation” completely ignores their decades of military service, prior experience and last-drawn salary in the Army, Navy or Air Force, they submitted.
The armed forces veterans contended that this results in a “worse-off” financial position, where their new combined income is often lower or less advantageous than their status while in active defence service.
Alleging “hostile discrimination”, they said, while public sector banks often provide pay protection to re-employed veterans, other government departments do not.
They claimed that treating veteran recruits with 15 to 20 years of experience as the same as “fresh entrants” is inherently unequal and violates Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
