Union of India & Ors Vs. B. Prasad,
B.S.O. & Ors  INSC 171 (17 February 1997)
RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI
APPEAL NOS. 1573-1576,1578-1579,1580-1585/97) (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.
17236-39, 14104, 15141-42, 15740, 25108-10 1996, SLP (C) No. 4398 /96
O R D E
heard learned counsel for the parties.
appeals by special leave arise from the various orders passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench in different matters. The main order was
passed on 17.11.1995 in RA No, 4/95 in OA No. 49/89.
Government of India have been issuing order from time to time payment of
allowances and facilities for civilian employees of the Central Government
servants working in the States and Union Territories of the The North-eastern
region. It is not in dispute that special Duty Allowance was ordered by the
Government @ 25% of the basic pay subject to ceiling of Rs. 400/- per month on
posting on any station in the North-eastern region. Subsequently, the
Government have been issuing order from time to time. In the proceedings dated April 17, 1995, The Government modified the
payment of the Special Duty Allowance and Special Compensatory (Remote
Locality) Allowance as under:
Defence Civilian employees, serving in the newly defined modified Field Areas,
will continue to be entitled to the Special Compensatory (Remote Locality)
Allowance and other allowances as admissible to defence Civilians, as hithertofore,
under existing instructions issued by this ministry from time to time.
in respect of Defence Civilian employees in the newly defined Field Areas,
Special Compensatory (Remote Locality) Allowance and other allowances not
concurrently admissible along with Field Service Concessions," It is
contended by Mr. P.P. Malhotra, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union
of India, That the view taken by the Tribunal that they are entitled to both,
is not correct and that they would be entitled to either of the allowances. Shri
P.P. Rao, Learned senior counsel appearing for some of the respondents has
contended that those civilian employee working in the defence service at
various stations in the North-eastern region were given Special Duty Allowance
with a view to attract the competent persons and the persons having been
deployed, are entitled to the same and the amended concessions would be
applicable to those employees who are transferred after April 17, 1975, All
those who were serving earlier would be entitled to both.
Jaitely, Learned senior counsel Appearing for some of the respondents has drawn
our attention to the distinction between Field area and Modified Field area and
submitted that in cases where civilian employees are supporting the field defence
persons deployed for the border operational requirements facing the immense
hostilities, they will be denied the payment of both allowances while the
personnel working in the Modified Field Area, In other words, in Barracks, will
entitled to double benefit of both the allowance. This creates hostile
discrimination and unjust results.
regards to the respective contentions, we are of the view that the Government
having been extending the benefit of payment of Special Duty Allowance to all
the defence employees working in the North-eastern region as per the orders
issued by the Government from time to time as on April 17, 1995, They are
entitled to both the Special Duty Allowance as well as Field Area Special
Compensatory (Remote Locality) Allowance. The same came to be modified w.e.f. that
date. Therefore, irrespective of the fact whether or not they have been
deployed earlier to that date, all are entitled to both the allowances only upto
all the personnel whether transferred earlier to that or transferred from on or
after that date, shall be entitled to payment of only one set of Special Duty
Allowance in terms of the above modified order.
regards the payment of Special Duty Allowance to the defence civilian personnel
deployed at the border area for support of operational requirement, they face
the imminent hostilities supporting the army personnel deployed there.
they alone require the double payment as ordered by the Government but they
cannot be deprived of the same since they are facing imminent hostilities in
hilly areas risking their lives as envisaged in the proceedings of the Army
dated January 13, 1994, But the Modified Field Area, in other words, in the defence
terminology, "barracks" in that area in a lesser risking area; hence
they shall not be entitled to double payment. Under these circumstances, Mr.
P.P. Malhotra is right in saying that the wording of the order requires
modification. The Government is directed to modify the order and issue the
appeals are disposed of accordingly. It is made clear that the Union of India
is not entitled to recover any payments made of the period prior to April 17, 1995. No costs.
Pages: 1 2