S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J. - (1.)WE have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.)THE petitioners had approached the Tribunal for a direction to grant them grade pay of Rs.4800 (PB -2) and Rs.5400/ - (PB -3) upon completion of four years as per the provisions of part -B Section II, serial No.1(1) of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 w.e.f. 1st January, 2006. The petitioners are working in Indian Coast Guard Organization which was established in the year 1977 by virtue of a decision of the Central Government. The said organisation was to have its own regular composite cadre of civilians for the headquarters and lower formations of employees. Till this end was achieved, the Government was to induct suitable persons on deputation from other Central Government Cadres. The Coast Guard used to resort to direct recruitment in the post of LDC, Assistant and Stenographers, Grade -D.
The petitioners have relied upon the hierarchy of posts and a pay structure that existed from time to time in view of recommendations of 3rd,

(3.)TH and 5th Pay Commissions. This has been disclosed in the form of tables sharing parity. The same is extracted below for convenience : -
Promotion and Feeder Grade Equivalent Promotion Equivalent Promotion in CGO and Feeder Grade in CSS and Feeder Grade in AFHQ SCSO DS JD CSO US DD SO SO SO Assistant Assistant Assistant UDC UDC UDC LDC LDC LDC
4. The grievance by the petitioners in the proceedings before CAT was that the parity which existed between a Section Officer in the Coast Guard of the two different groups, i.e. PB -2 and PB -3 with other similarly placed officials in the Central Secretariat Services and Armed Forces Headquarters, was sought to be denied by the respondents. It was argued before the CAT that this denial of parity was arbitrary and not based on any rationale. In support of their submissions, the petitioners relied upon the Recruitment Rules and the staffing pattern in the Coast Guard as compared with the other organisations which contain a similar hierarchy of civilian posts.