1. One of the recommendations made by the Pay Commission was that the scales of pay of Rs. 1400-2000 and Rs. 2000-3200 should be treated as functional grades requiring promotion as per normal procedure for the staff in the IA and AD and other Accounts Organisations. The number of posts to be placed in these two scales were to be decided by the Government

2. Accordingly, the Government examined the position and identified the posts and issued office memo that the appointments to the extent of the number of posts identified should be made with effect from 1-4- 1987. It, therefore, follows that the revised pay scales as recommended by the Pay Commission could be paid to the holders of the posts so identified in the Accounts wing only with effect from 1-4- 1987

3. The Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal by its decision dated 26-4-1991 in OA No. 12 of 1988 which was impugned in the present case, held as follows

"Accordingly, we direct that the respondents shall fix the applicants in the revised scales of pay w.e.f. 1-1-1986 on notional basis and make actual payment of the differential amount consequent to refixation of pay in the revised scale of pay w.e.f. 1-4-1987 in accordance with Ministry of Finances Notification referred to earlier...." *

4. It is thus apparent that in effect the direction of the Tribunal was that the holders of the said identified posts should be fixed in the revised scales of pay with effect from 1-1-1986 on notional basis and the differential amount consequent on refixation of pay from 1-4- 1987 was to be paid to the employees in accordance with the Ministry of Finance Notification

5. This decision of the Tribunal was the subject-matter of various special leave petitions filed in this Court. One of such petitions, viz., SLP (C) No. 13492 of 1991 was the main petition in the present case. It had come up before a Bench of three learned Judges and was rejected summarily on 3-9-1991 without giving reasons. Thereafter, some other special leave petitions against the decision of different benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal on the same subject including the said decision of its Full Bench came up for decision before a Bench of two Judges of this Court and the said Bench by its decision in Union of India v. Secy., Madras Civil Audit and Accounts Assn. 1 held that since the posts were identified for the first time only w.e.f. 1-4-1987, the revised pay scales could be paid to the holders of the said posts only from that date and from no earlier date. In effect, therefore, this Court by the said judgment did not approve of the said decision dated 26-4-1991 of the Full Bench of the Tribunal which had taken the view that the revised pay scales should be fixed notionally from 1-1-1986 and consequently the difference between the pay scales from 1-1-1986 and 1-4-1987, should be paid to the employees

6. Consequent upon the said decision of this Court which was pronounced on 4-2-1992, a review petition was filed in the present proceedings on 21-2-1992, which was heard by circulation and dismissed on 15-3-1993, obviously without noticing the decision of this Court pronounced on 4-2-1992. It is for this reason that the present interlocutory application has been filed to resolve the anomaly between the two decisions of this Court

7. After hearing the learned counsel, we are of the view that the Full Bench decision of the Tribunal dated 26-4-1991 requires rectification in the light of the decision of this Court in Secy., Madras Civil Audit and Accounts Assn. case1 with which we are in complete agreement. Since the review petition was dismissed on 15-3- 1993 without noticing the said decision, it is needless to emphasis that the said dismissal does not come in our way for the view we are taking at present

8. The result, therefore, is that the respondent-employees in the present proceedings would be entitled to the revised pay scales only with effect from 1-4-1987 since the revised pay scale will be fixed for the first time with effect from that date. They are not entitled to any difference on the basis of the notional fixation of pay w.e.f. 1-1-1986. The arrears, if any, paid to the respondent-employees on account of the notional fixation of their pay w.e.f. 1-1-1986 may be recovered from their future salaries. It s, however, made clear that the said arrears shall not be recovered from those of the employees who have already retired from service

9. The interlocutory application is allowed accordingly with no order as to costs.