Naik Shyam Narayan Singh (Army) vs UOI & Others on 13 October 2025

**ORDER**

**13.10.2025**

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to step up the basic pay of the applicant at par with his coursemates and to remove the anomaly on the basic pay of the applicant wef 01/1/2006, 14/1/2013, 01/1/2016 and 14/1/2020 accordingly. He has also prayed for paying the costs of the application.

2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 14/1/2004. He was granted ACP Naik on 14/1/2013 and ACP Havildar on 22/1/2020. However, the Respondents had arbitrarily and unreasonably not actioned Option to the advantage of the applicant at the time of implementation of 6^th CPC wef 01/1/2006 and again on 7^th CPC wef 01/1/2016. The applicant had exercised his option to opt from date of increment as per policy. However, the Respondents had exercised and taken into consideration the Option I which was not advantageous to the applicant and it is continuously causing financial loss to the applicant. The pay of disparity between the applicant and his other course mates is continuing creating heavy financial loss to the applicant. In order to receive his rightful pay band he submitted his personal application, however, the Respondents, vide their letter dated 11/12/2018 rejected the claim of the applicant by erroneously stating that, " as regards grant of increment in respect of personnel who are mustered after one year from the date of attestation, it is clarified that such personnel will be entitled to first increment only from the date of mustering subject to uniform date of increment from 01 July under the provisions contained in Para 11 of SAI 1/S/2008". In support of the arguments of the applicant, he has placed reliance on the Order passed in favour of Sub Chittar Singh Vs UOI in OA No 113/2014, wherein it is held that, " it will be the duty of the PAO (OR) to ensure that out of the two options, the more beneficial option is given effect and, therefore, even if one has not submitted the option, it was the duty of the PAO (OR) to at least offer the beneficial provisions to the petitioners. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA, praying for relief.

3. Vide Reply Statement, the Respondents have submitted that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 14/1/2004 and presently serving with 618 EME Bn. He had passed TTT-3 on 09/1/2009 vide EME Records Part II order No 1/1557/011/2013. He was promoted to the rank of Substantive Naik wef 16/7/2020 with ante date seniority wef 09/5/2020. As regards grant of increment to personnel who are mustered after one year from the date of attestation, it is clarified that such personnel will be entitled to next increment only from the date of mustering subject to uniform date of increment from 1st July under the provisions contained in Para 11 of SAI 1/S/2008. With regard to the plea of the applicant, the issue was raised with PAO (OR) EME, who have clarified that, " the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 14/1/2004, granted ACP rank on 14/1/2012 and MACP Hav on 22/1/2020. No option was received for fixation of pay wef 01/1/2016, fixation of pay will be carried out if the option is not received in time and the applicant is deemed to have elected to be governed by the revised pay structure wef 01/1/2006 in terms of Para 8 (c) of SAI 1/S/2008 dated 11/10/2008. Further, the applicant was mustered on 09/1/2009 and entitled for first increment wef July 2009 onwards, whereas Junior coursemate has been mustered earlier than the applicant and his Junior, No 14667376F Naik Kalwale Babu Prabhu mustered on 10/3/2005, ie, four years in advance. Hence, he cannot be treated as junior with reference to the applicant. Hence, the Junior is drawing more pay than the applicant and therefore, the applicant is drawing less pay due to delay in mustering and not due to exercise of option for fixation of pay. In view of this, pay of the applicant was fixed correctly by the PAO (OR) EME and, hence, the OA filed by the applicant is infructuous, devoid of merit and lacks substance.

4. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

5. From the foregoing, it is apparent that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 14/1/2004 and was attested as a trained soldier on 31/1/2005. He had passed TTT-3 on 09/1/2009. The applicant was promoted to the rank of ACP Naik on 14/1/2012 and MACP Havildar on 22/1/2020. Further, since the applicant was mustered on 09/1/2009, he was eligible for grant of first increment wef July 2009 onwards. As per the statement of the Respondents, his junior mustered on 10/3/2005, ie, four years prior to the mustering of the applicant, hence, his junior was getting more pay than the applicant and not due to exercise of option of pay, but because of delayed mustering.

6. Notwithstanding the above and since juniors getting more than pay than the seniors is a cause of heartburn, we deem it appropriate to remit the case back to the Respondents to reconsider the plea of the applicant. We expect the Respondents to take a fresh look into the entire gamut of the issue in a holistic manner of the disparity of pay, vis-à-vis the junior of the applicant, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The outcome shall be intimated to the applicant accordingly.

The State Emblem of India, featuring the Lion Capital of Ashoka, with the motto 'Satyameva Jayate' (Truth Alone Triumphs) written below it.

7. The OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.

8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed off.

The seal of the Armed Forces Tribunal is centered, featuring a circular emblem with the text 'श्रम बल अधिकार' (Labour Rights) at the top and 'ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL' at the bottom. Inside the circle is a scale of justice and an eagle. Below the seal is a banner with the motto 'यतो न्यायः ततो जयः' (Where there is justice, there is victory). To the left of the seal, there is a signature 'Sd/- XXX' and the name '(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)'. To the right of the seal, there is a signature 'Sd/- XXX' and the name '(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)'. The text 'cda/-' is written to the left of the seal.