ORDER
V.K. Bali, J. (Chairman)
1.Shri P.K. Sarin, an Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department, has filed this Application against non-payment of salary in cash by the Chief Engineer, Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi, Public Works Department for the months of February, March and April 2007. The prayer of the applicant made in this Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is for a direction to the respondents to make payment of salary to him in cash as per the rules and to quash instruction, if any, contrary to Statutory Rules. He also seeks payment of interest @ 18% on arrears of pay for the months of February, March and April 2007 onwards till the date of payment.
2. Primarily and in fact, the only contention raised by the applicant, who appears in person, is that once the rules prescribes one of the modes of payment of salary by way of cash, it would be the choice of the applicant to receive the salary in cash and any other mode adopted by the respondents for payment of salary would be wholly unacceptable to him.
3. Pursuant to notice issued by the Tribunal, respondents have entered appearance and contested the cause of the applicant. It has inter alia been pleaded in the reply that the mode of payment of salary cannot be termed to be service condition or service matter, hence, the OA is liable to be rejected outrightly. It has further been pleaded that the OA is an abuse of process of law and does not relate to infringement of any right vested in the employee. Applicant, it is pleaded, has failed to disclose any enforceable right, breach of which may justify filing of the present OA. On merits, it is stated that on the advice of Reserve Bank of India (RBI), it has been decided as a policy by Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi to disburse the salary of employees through Electronic Clearance System (ECS) introduced by RBI. The system of payment of salary to all the employees working in Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi through ECS has been introduced vide order dated 28.6.2002 after obtaining prior approval of the CGA, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India and taking into consideration provisions of Information Technology Act, 2000. As per the system, payment of salary would be credited into the bank accounts of the employees directly. The system of payment of salary of the employees of Government through ECS has been considered as the major administrative reform, which offers remarkable simplifications by removal of the need for issue of cheques and providing for immediate transfer of funds to the designated accounts of the employee. The Central Vigilance Commission also vide their office order dated 06.04.2004 under Section 8(1)(h) of C.V.C. Act issued instructions for compliance by all Government departments regarding payment of salary and other payments to the employees through ECS. It has also been pleaded that it is a matter of record that the applicant has submitted a representation to the department for release of salary in cash for the months of February, March and April, 2007. It has further been pleaded that the contents of Civil Accounts Manual referred to by the applicant are procedural and prescribe the guidelines for the accounts personnel in discharge of their functions relating to disbursal of salary. It has also been pleaded that provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 govern the field. The decision taken by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to make the payment of salary to all its employees through ECS in place of system of payment by cheques or cash is in accordance with the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Relevant portion of Section 6(1) of the Act ibid reads as follows:
Use of electronic records and digital signatures in Government and its agencies. – (1) Where any law provides for
the filing of any form, application or any other document with any office, authority, body or agency owned or controlled by the appropriate Government in a particular manner;
the issue or grant of any licence, permit, sanction or approval by whatever name called in a particular manner;
the receipt or payment of money in a particular manner,
then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied if such filing, issue, grant, receipt or payment, as the case may be, is effected by means of such electronic form as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government.
4. It has further been pleaded that salary bills for the months of February, March and April, 2007 in respect of the applicant were considered by the Pay and Accounts Officer NO.XII and it was observed that the information required to arrange the payments of salary through ECS in respect of the applicant has not been provided by the administrative department, which was an ultimate requirement to be fulfilled by the applicant. As such, the payment of salary for the months of February, March and April, 2007 could not be released.
5. We have heard applicant, who appears in person, and Shri Ajesh Luthra, learned Counsel representing the respondents. Having given our thought to the plea raised by the applicant, we are of the view that applicant has only raised an academic issue. The Tribunal in the course of the arguments required to know from the applicant as to what loss he will sustain, if he gets the salary by the mode as prescribed by the Government. But for stating that some of the currency notes that he may receive by the mode prescribed by the Government may be fake, he is unable to point out any prejudice that may be caused to him in receiving the salary by the mode prescribed by the Government. On specific question as to what will happen if some currency notes are fake, even if he gets payment by cash by the mode suggested by him, he is not able to answer anything. It is trite that judicial forums adjudicate an issue which may adversely affect a citizen. It is only where injustice is caused to an employee the Tribunal interferes. The applicant has raised only an academic issue without showing any prejudice having been caused to him. The applicant would, however, insist that mere administrative instructions would not be enough to do away or depart from said provisions for which he has also cited a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in G.J. Fernandez v. The State of Mysore and Ors. .
6. In the context of stated facts, the mode of payment, as thought over by the Government, does not adversely affect any of the civil rights of the applicant and that being so, we refrain to go into the issue raised by the applicant even though we may hasten to add that mode of payment of salary appears to have sanction of law in view of Section 6(1) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and further that uniform policy adopted by Government appears to be guided on good grounds.
7. Before we may part with the order, we may also mention that applicant also relies upon some judicial precedents to urge that he is entitled to interest for non-payment of salaries for three months. We only mention that applicant had refused to accept salary by the mode as suggested by the Government. It is not a case of non-payment of the salary to the applicant.
8. There is no merit in the application. It is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.