SC refuses to entertain plea of Army veterans against current pay-fixation rules

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea filed by a group of ex-servicemen challenging the validity of the current pay-fixation rules, alleging that the existing framework unfairly penalises Army veterans who join civil services after their retirement.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, however, allowed lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay to make a representation in this regard to the authorities concerned which, in turn, will take a decision as early as possible.

The bench said if the petitioners, including lead petitioner Baidya Nath Choudhary, are dissatisfied, they can approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) with the grievances.

Choudhary and five others, in their plea filed through advocate-on-record Ashwani Dubey, had 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.

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, had said the current rules force them to start at the “minimum pay level” of their new posts.

This “mechanical fixation” completely ignores their decades of military service, prior experience and last-drawn salary in the Army, Navy or Air Force, the plea had said.

The armed forces veterans had said 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.

The plea had alleged “hostile discrimination” and said while public sector banks often provide pay protection to re-employed veterans, other government departments do not.

It had further claimed that treating veteran recruits with 15 to 20 years of experience as the same as “fresh entrants” is inherently unequal and violative of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.