Delhi HC directs ICAI to Re-Adjudicate on Non-Speaking Order in Plea against unusual Salary Difference caused by Accelerated Promotion Scheme [Read Order]

“Supreme Court has been repeatedly emphasizing that reasoned and speaking orders must be passed by the Authorities so that the person aggrieved is in a position to know the reason which has weighed with the employer for rejecting his claim.”

-Delhi High Court

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has been served with a direction to re-adjudicate on plea against the unusual pay difference between senior and junior employees, by the Delhi High Court owing to the lack of reasons cited in the non-speaking order.

On behalf of the Petitioner, it was submitted by Udian Sharma, Jaitegan Khurana and Vashita Gupta that many of the juniors of the Petitioner were drawing more pay than him which has created an anomaly and despite several representations to the Respondent-ICAI, no steps had been initiated to step up the pay of the Petitioner.

It was further submitted that Petitioner and his juniors belong to the same cadre and were promoted to the same posts starting from Section Officer to Assistant Secretary.

“It is not anyone’s case that the juniors have acquired any additional qualification so as to receive higher pay than the senior and it is obvious that the anomaly is the result of giving effect to the Accelerated Promotion Scheme, since prior thereto, the juniors were drawing lesser salary than the Petitioner”, he went on.

It was argued that even after having made so many representations, the ICAI had rejected the same by a non-speaking and unreasoned one-line order which does not even indicate the reason for not accepting the plea of the Petitioner.

The petitioner retired as a Deputy Secretary from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) in September 2021 after serving for more than 39 years. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition was that after the restoration of the Accelerated Promotion Scheme in the year 2015 with effect from 01.01.2006, Petitioner was drawing a lesser salary than his juniors.

Taking note of the communication from ICAI as follows: –

“Shri Alok Malhotra,

This has reference to DCOYA/E/2022/07507, DOPAT/E/2022/19108, DCOYA/E/2022/07704 and other queries regarding anomaly.

Your representation is examined and it is observed that no case is made out for anomaly as contended therein.

Please treat the correspondence on the subject as closed”, the Single bench of the Delhi High Court has observed that, “It is clear from the aforesaid order that it does not disclose any reason for rejection of the claim of the Petitioner. The Supreme Court has been repeatedly emphasizing that reasoned and speaking orders must be passed by the Authorities so that the person aggrieved is in a position to know the reason which has weighed with the employer for rejecting his claim.”

“Additionally, if the order is reasoned, the Court which is called upon to adjudicate the claims of an employee would also be in a position to understand why the grievance of the Petitioner has not been redressed by the employer, and passing of a reasoned order becomes important in a matter of this nature which pertains to pay fixation and pay anomaly in which it is crucial to understand the stand of the Respondent”, the bench further noted.

Directing ICAI to reconsider the representation of the petitioner, along with the issues raised in the writ petition, the Delhi High Court Single Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh directed that “Respondent shall take a decision and pass a speaking order within a period of four weeks from today. The order will be communicated to the Petitioner within a week of passing of the order and the Petitioner shall be at liberty to take recourse to remedies available in law, if aggrieved and so advised.”

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates