w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Nursing Teachers Association (Regd.), National Institute of Nursing Education & Others v/s Union of India, Through Secretary to Govt. of India, New Delhi & Others

Company & Directors' Information:- M G INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U80301DL2002PTC118047

Company & Directors' Information:- A. S. INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100MP2009PLC022300

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TN1919PTC000911

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1941PTC003461

Company & Directors' Information:- NURSING & COMPANY LTD [Under Liquidation] CIN = U51900WB1962PLC011829

Company & Directors' Information:- M. S. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION PVT. LTD. [Active] CIN = U80301DL2006PTC152100

Company & Directors' Information:- NATIONAL UNION CORPN PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1940PTC010240

Company & Directors' Information:- P R EDUCATION INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U80903DL2004PTC129195

Company & Directors' Information:- V C EDUCATION INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U80903DL2004PTC129201

Company & Directors' Information:- R V EDUCATION INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U80903DL2004PTC129311

Company & Directors' Information:- NATIONAL UNION LTD [Not available for efiling] CIN = U74999KL1951PLC000818

    O.A.No. 60/00842 of 2014 & M.A.No. 60/01261 of 2014

    Decided On, 04 August 2015

    At, Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench

    By, MEMBER (A)

    For the Applicants: Rohit Seth, Advocate. For the Respondents: Sanjay Goyal, Advocate.

Judgment Text

Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J).

1. In this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have sought the following relief:-

'(i) Quash inaction of the respondents in implementing the decision dated 17.01.2011 of the competent authority i.e. Governing Body to again restore the designation of Sister Tutor in NINE, PGIMER, Chandigarh by undoing the re-designation earlier done from Sister Tutor to Clinical Instructor under decision/approval/orders of Governing Body itself despite representation dated 27.01.2012 by Nursing Teachers Association and for direction to respondents to implement the decision dated 17.01.2011 by the competent Authority i.e. Governing body by applying the same analogy as re-designation earlier done in year 1997 from Sister Tutor to Clinical Instructor was also under decision/approval/orders of Governing body and as a consequence restore the pay scales with all consequential benefits to which the Clinical Instructors of PGIMER, Chandigarh (Formerly Sister Tutors) were earlier getting at par with their counter-parts (Sister Tutors/ Tutors) in AIIMS, New Delhi as the inaction of the authorities in the matter is arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and against the Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India'.

2. The facts do not require any detailed narration as it is admitted position from the pleadings of the parties that the issue of re-designation of the Post of Clinical Instructor to that of Sister Tutor in the College of Nursing at PGIMER, Chandigarh, was placed before the Governing Body and Institute Body in its meeting held on 17.01.2011 which 'approved the agenda in principle, subject to examination of the full facts of the case in the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare'. The matter was sent to Respondent No.1 for according approval for the proposal to re-designate the post of Clinical Instructor to that of Sister Tutor and revision of pay scale from PB-2 Rs.9300-34800, Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- to PB-3 Rs.15600-39100 with grade pay of Rs.5400/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 so as to bring them at par with their counter parts working in AIIMS, New Delhi. However, the Respondent No.1 vide letter dated 29.12.2011 asked the PGIMER to take up the issue of cadre review of the entire Nursing Cadre instead of taking up re-designation/up gradation in peace meals. Request has been made to the PGIMER, Chandigarh to take action expeditiously and send the proposal/recommendation with full justification/details. However, the PGIMER, Chandigarh, reiterated its earlier request for re-designation/grant of higher pay scale. The correspondence has been exchanged between two authorities and vide letter dated 1.7.2014 some information has been sought by respondent no.1 from PGIMER and the same has been furnished also with a request to expedite the decision. However, the written statement clearly states that 'Ministry has already asked the Institute to carry out cadre restructuring of National Institute of Nursing Education, PGIMER, Chandigarh. The agenda for the same shall be placed before the Standing Academic Committee of the Institute in the forthcoming meeting'. Thus, stand of the respondents is that since the issue is engaging attention of the authorities and no final decision has yet been taken, the O.A. be dismissed as pre-mature.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on the file.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that since the issue is pending consideration at the hands of the relevant authorities and as such the O.A. may be disposed of as pre-mature at this stage and they may be afforded reasonable time to conclude the consideration as the matter is complex one and needs thorough deliberation.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the respondents are whiling away time by making unnecessary correspondence between them and as such a time limit may be fixed for concluding the consideration and bringing the same to a logical conclusion.

6. In view of the aforesaid factual scenario and without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Original Application is disposed of with a

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

direction to the competent authorities amongst the respondents to consider the claim of the applicants for re-designation of the post/grant of higher pay scale and or restructuring of the cadre as mentioned above within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. M.A.No.060/0126/2014 for condonation of delay also stands disposed of as not pressed at this stage. 8. The parties are left to bear their own costs.