Claim for Higher Pay Grade Unsustainable in Nagpur Municipal Corporation Employees' Absorption Case – Bombay High Court
Safiya Malik
The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, comprising Justice Avinash G. Gharote and Justice Abhay J. Mantri, has dismissed a petition challenging the fixation of pay scale and grade pay for employees absorbed into different departments following the abolition of their previous posts. The court stated that the petitioners failed to establish their entitlement to a higher grade pay.
The petition was filed by four employees of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) who were originally appointed as ‘Hydrant Mistries’ in the Fire Brigade Department between August and November 2004. Their initial pay scale was Rs.3050-4590/-. They were recruited through the municipal corporation’s employment process and were engaged in duties related to fire safety, water hydrant maintenance, and fire brigade operations.
By an administrative decision, the post of Hydrant Mistry was abolished through Resolution No.97 dated 18-05-2015, and the employees occupying those positions were transferred to other departments within the NMC. This restructuring was a result of municipal policy reforms aimed at rationalizing human resource deployment.
Pursuant to the resolution, the petitioners were absorbed into different departments with protection of their pay scale. By an order dated 14-12-2016, petitioner No.1 was reassigned as a ‘Library Assistant’ in the Library Department, while petitioners No.2 to 4 were appointed as ‘Tax Collectors’ in the Tax Department. Their salary structure was adjusted, and they were placed in a pay band of Rs.5200-20200/- with a grade pay of Rs.1900/-.
The petitioners were granted the benefit of time-bound promotion under a circular issued on 21-10-2011. However, they were awarded a revised grade pay of Rs.2400/- upon completion of twelve years of service instead of Rs.2800/- which, they argued, was due to them. The crux of their claim was that their previous post of ‘Hydrant Mistry’ should have led to a promotional track in line with the hierarchy of the Fire Brigade Department, specifically to the post of ‘Senior Leading Fireman,’ which carried a grade pay of Rs.2800/-.
The petitioners contended that since their original appointment was in the Fire Brigade Department, their promotion should have been assessed based on the existing promotional hierarchy of that department. They further argued that their absorption into different departments should not affect their promotional benefits as they had completed the necessary period of service while in the Fire Brigade Department. They relied on precedents where employees transferred across departments were granted pay protection and promotional benefits based on their initial cadre’s hierarchy.
The court examined the relevant municipal records, including the Establishment Schedule of the NMC, employment policies, and the service structure of the Fire Brigade Department. The court determined that the absorption of the petitioners into other departments was an administrative decision that protected their pay but did not entitle them to career progression identical to what they might have received had they remained in the Fire Brigade Department.
The court recorded:
“The petitioners were absorbed into the new departments on an equivalent post and pay scale. Their seniority and financial benefits were preserved. However, the petitioners failed to establish that their next promotional post would have been ‘Senior Leading Fireman.’”
On examining the municipal records, the court found that in the Fire Brigade Department, the natural progression from ‘Hydrant Mistry’ was to ‘Leading Fireman,’ which had a grade pay of Rs.2400/-. The position of ‘Senior Leading Fireman,’ which carried a grade pay of Rs.2800/-, was a promotion beyond ‘Leading Fireman.’ The court noted:
“The next promotional post for ‘Hydrant Mistry’ is ‘Leading Fireman’ with a pay scale of Rs.5200-20200/- and grade pay of Rs.2400/-. The claim that they should have been granted the grade pay applicable to ‘Senior Leading Fireman’ is incorrect.”
Additionally, the court observed that the petitioners had not challenged Resolution No.97 dated 18-05-2015, which abolished their posts, nor had they contested the absorption order dated 14-12-2016. By accepting their absorption into the Library and Tax Departments, the petitioners had effectively acquiesced to their reassignment and could not now demand benefits from a promotional structure that no longer applied to them.
The court further examined the pay structure of the posts the petitioners currently occupied. According to the Establishment Schedule, the next promotional post of a ‘Library Assistant’ was ‘Assistant Librarian,’ with a grade pay of Rs.2400/-, while the next promotional post of a ‘Tax Collector’ was ‘Junior Tax Collector,’ also with a grade pay of Rs.2400/-. The court stated:
“The petitioners have not demonstrated that their current posts in the Library and Tax Departments have a higher promotional scale that entitles them to grade pay of Rs.2800/-.”
In its assessment, the court noted that when the petitioners were originally appointed as ‘Hydrant Mistry,’ they were in the pay scale of Rs.5200-20200/- with a grade pay of Rs.1900/-. This pay scale was protected upon their absorption into the new departments. As such, their first-time-bound promotion correctly placed them in the grade pay of Rs.2400/-, in accordance with the rules governing their new cadre.
The court rejected the petitioners’ argument that they should receive the promotional benefits of the Fire Brigade Department when they were no longer serving in that department. It also held that the promotional structure of the Library and Tax Departments was distinct from that of the Fire Brigade Department and that the employees could not selectively claim benefits from different department structures. The judgement noted:
“The petitioners, by virtue of their absorption, are governed by the pay structure and promotional avenues applicable to their new departments. The claim for grade pay applicable to a different departmental hierarchy is unsustainable.”
After examining the case in detail, the court concluded that the petitioners had failed to establish their entitlement to a grade pay of Rs.2800/-. The judgement recorded:
“The petitioners have not provided sufficient grounds to prove that they should have been granted the pay scale of ‘Senior Leading Fireman.’ The benefit of first-time-bound promotion was correctly extended to them with a grade pay of Rs.2400/-.”
The petition was accordingly dismissed.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. S.S. Sanyal, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. J.B. Kasat, Advocate
Case Title: Vijay s/o Shalikram Khobragade & Ors. v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025: BHC-NAG:2343-DB
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 5274 of 2021
Bench: Justice Avinash G. Gharote & Justice Abhay J. Mantri
[Read/Download order]
