Court Case Update

· Pay revision of Technician w.e.f 1/12/1983

OA No. 164/96, In the Principal bench of CAT, New Delhi ARTEE V/S UOI & Others Filed on 19/1/1996. This case was dismissed on 14/12/1999.
Thereafter ARTEE filed civil writ petition no. 3787/277 in High Court against the order of CAT, Delhi dated 14/12/1999. This case was listed on 02/9/2003 but on the date no reply was given from Govt. side so court has given next date of 11 Dec'2003. House opined unanimously that this Association is not averse to the grant of notional fixation of pay for the technician cadre at par with Lighting Assistants as proposed by DG AIR letter dated 30/10/2002. At the same time it is also resolved that the case filed by Association for revision of payscale of Technicians vis-à-vis Lighting Assistant w.e.f. Dec'83 vide CWP no. 3787 / 2000 will be pursued with all seriousness.

· Removal of Qualification bar for JTS promotions.
Hemant Kumar Malhotra & R.C. Nadir V/S UOI in CAT, Lucknow OA No. 218/1995. OA allowed in favour of petitioner AEs on 28/10/2002. ARTEE took over the case. Caveat was filed on 17/12/2002 in Lucknow bench of High Court. Contempt notice was subsequently filed in Lucknow bench of CAT after the expiry of 6 months time (from 28/10/2002) and after the ministry renewed/extended the ad-hoc promotion of 139 AEs to ADE. Civil writ Petition (CWP) no. 251 of 2003 was filed in Lucknow bench of Allahabad High court UOI & others V/S R.C. Nadir & others (against judgement dated 28/10/2002 in OA No. 218/1995).

· Recovery of OTA/Bonus
Ineligibility due to hike in pay after revision of Pay Scale of EA w.e.f. 1/1/1978. OA No. 2341/95 in the Principal Bench of CAT, New Delhi. Stay on recovery of OTA/Bonus granted. OA No. 2341/95 allowed in favour of ARTEE on 9.3.2002

NARAD Round-up
· Not long ago an SEA from Delhi was asked to go on tour, as a back up for the inauguration of News-on-Phone service. Though the set-up was complete and working to the satisfaction. But just a day before the inauguration he was called by the higher ups, and told to proceed on tour so that there are no hiccups during the inauguration. But to be very polite, the manner in which this was told was very disgusting. The boss told him to go in an un-reserved class, as getting reservation would be difficult. Even other officials were very surprised when this was told to them. Everybody suggested that he should have been asked to fly rather than going by train in this manner, considering the nature of assignment. Anyhow better sense prevailed, and he finally went by 1st AC, only to find next morning at the destination, senior officers had just flown in from the Directorate. To top it all, one of the officer who was flown there was missing during the entire show.

· Talking more of this, we all know of the so-called re-deployment, where in only the subordinate cadre is the central character. Now let us see some statistics of the IB(E)S cadre. In Delhi, all of 13 posts of CEs are filled. In EZ there is no CE for the last several months. In SZ there is just one CE out of 3 (2 posts are lying vacant for the last 18 months) and in WZ again there is only one CE and the other 2 posts are vacant for the last 4 months. Why EZ is without a CE, and SZ and WZ without 2 of them ? How about re-deployment of the CEs ? Don't these zones require any of them or nobody is ready to move to these zones ? And when these zones are doing fine without them, why to crib for more, just go ahead and redeploy them as is being done in our case. Different rules for different people?

· After the election results ARTEE desired that Sh. Anilkumar S. (Gen.Sec.) be posted in DDK Delhi, in order to bring him near to the HQ. The request was sent to the Directorate. After sometime, an order came out in which Sh Anilkumar S. was transferred to the O/O CE (R&D) New Delhi. We had absolutely no problem with that, but on enquiring about this decision we were told by the AIR Directorate that as per our request he has been brought to Delhi. Surprisingly, we found that the attitude was rather confrontationist. We tried to explore the matter little more and realized that the actual reason is something else, 'both AIR and DD directorates don't seem to be in best of terms'. But our contention is, why are we made to suffer because of the tussle between the top. So, it was against this backdrop that a sit-in dharna was organized outside the office of E-in-C, AIR. Of course Anil Kumar's case was just an excuse and not the issue. We put up a good show and I suppose the message is well received.