MACP ON PROMOTIONAL
HIERARCHY
HIERARCHY
SLP(C) NO. 21803/2014 (UNION OF INDIA & ORS VS. M.V. MOHANAN NAIR) TAGGED WITH CASE NUMBERS SLP(C) NO. 22181/2014 , SLP(C) NO. 23335/2014, SLP(C) NO. 23333/2014, SLP(C) NO. 18227/2015
Case Details
STATUS PENDING
Special Leave Petition (Civil) 21803 / 2014
Petitioner UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Vs.
Respondent M.V. MOHANAN NAIR
Advocate(Petitioner) MR. B. V. BALARAM DAS
Advocate(Respondent) MR. C. K. SASI
Appealed Against High Court Details - Not Available
Matter is Connected To Connected Details - Not Available
Subject Matter MATTERS RELATING TO JUDICIARY MATTERS PERTAINING TO EMPLOYEESOF DISTRICT COURTS AND TRIBUNALS
Listing Details Likely to be Listed on - 04/04/2016
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, March 03, 2016 - 2:35:45 PM
No. 22034/04/2013-Estt.(D)
ReplyDeleteGovernment of India
Ministry of Personnel Public Grievance & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 01.03.2016
Office Memorandum
Subject:- References / Representations / Court Cases in various Ministries / Departments / Organisations for grant of MACPS benefits in the promotional hierarchy – reg.
In continuation of DOPT’s earlier O.M. of even no. dated 20.01.2016 on the above mentioned subject, the undersigned is directed to forward a copy of the decision of Hon’ble CAT, Ahmedabad bench in OA No. 120/000018/2015 filed by Shri Manubhai B. Rathore Vs. UOI &Ors whereby the demand of the applicant for MACP in promotional Hierarchy has been dismissed.
sd/-
(G.Jayanthi)
Director (E-I)
Phone No. 23092479
what's ur opionion in this posted by another site on central govt employee news. Do you have any idea about the consequences of this and how can a single case dismisal will decide the fate of other cases that are in final judgement stage and how can govt will extend it to the all cases by issuing DOPT order that wasn't held when the govt was defeated in court and forced to implement it for one person. at that time they didn't extend it to all by saying it was a technical fault then why not this time a technical fault. it's double standard the govt adopting NDA is indifferent with the UPA in this matter.
Immature working of Madam Jayanthi.. Non experienced..
DeleteImmature working of Madam Jayanthi.. Non experienced..
DeleteI lost my hope. Our judicial system is purely linked with the Politicians. The SC/HC judges are dancing according to the directions issued by the Politicians. If it is not brought to the direct notice of Modi or Press/Media we cannot get this case atleast heard on 04.04.2016. I dont know what is the action taken by the steering committee? I doubt whether our counsel are also playing double game?
ReplyDeleteGovt. is playing the game of hide & seek. It is tough time for employees. Justice delayed justice denied. Jai ho hindustan...
ReplyDeleteIt is not good to connect this judgement with all other cases as lot of judgements are favour for the employees. I think the matter was not pursued fairly before the court
ReplyDeleteEarlier it was time bound promotional thereafter ACP on promotional hierarchy all these in promotional post hierarchy and people till introduction of MACP got the benefits later after introduction of macp the people will get grade pay hierarchy in which the gap from PB-2+4200 to PB2+5400 is too much that it can not be bridge in thirty years whereas earlier it was the matter of 8/12 years. How can it will be justified the employee from the same cadre with same length of service get the two different treatments in scales as they are governed by the two diffrerent schemes of promotion. can any one justify that? promotional scheme is brought always for the betterment of the employee not for the harassment or discouragement.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that this judgment is for confusing the matter further. Why the DOP&T had not issued the same OM when Delhi High Court and Punjab High Court directed for implementation of MACP on promotional hierarchy. What the justification in not implementing the MACP on promotional hierarchy. The issue of seniors who completed 24 years(under ACP) got GP Rs.5400 before 01.9.2008, juniors getting GP Rs.4800 after 01.09.2008. This is not discrimination.
ReplyDeleteWhat about the DOP&T OM in which it was sought the information on which ever is beneficial of ACP and MACP. The Anomalies Committee did not resolve the issue till date. When you refer Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment, it has taken this issue into consideration. Instead of resolving the issues, which are pending for a long time, DOP&T did not waste time in issuing this type of OM. Rogues in the DOP&T did not understand this, because they got Non functional grades. Why this is not implemented for all cadres. Associations, Unions, conferations, National JCM are also mum on this issue.
Delhi High Court judgment dated 04.04.2011 is flawed. The issues raised in the Anomalies Committee were not taken into consideration in the judgment dated 04.04.2011. Punjab and Haryana High Court had rightly taken this issues and given the judgment in favour of the affected employees. The same points were taken by Delhi High Court in its judgments in case of NCERT, Shri Sanjay Kumar case. Why DOP&T is giving more weightage to Delhi High Court judgment dated 04.04.2011 and CAT Judgement of Ahmedabad Bench, when in fact there are so many other case decided by the Delhi High Court later on the basis of Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment. This is an calculated attempts to derail the case on MACP on promotional hierarchy.
This judgement has overlooked the basic fact that ACP or MACP is provided to grant only the financial benefit to an eligible person who has put in 10 years of service in a particular grade and would have been promoted in normal course. JUST because the post is not available at higher end should not deter the grant of benefit, at least on financial terms. This is the BASIS of ACP/MACP concept and should be followed. It is a failure of the administrative machinery particularly DOPT for opposing their own guidelines. No outcome for last 10 years of deliberations and incapacitated ANAMOLY COMMITTEE has made the employees suffer.
anamoly committee getting huge honorium ta/da each n every meeting that's why they only discussing points not taken action, once committee take action in employees favour there income will stop, there cheated with employees.
ReplyDeletevaida pe vaida, vaida pe vaida - will this case ever reach its conslusion - of getting benefits for employees.
ReplyDeleteI am agree with Mr. Senviji. Before implementation of 7th CPC, we shoul d expect Upgradation under MACP on promotional hierarchy for pay fixation in new scale. Perhaps, the matter will only decided after elections in four states.
ReplyDeleteAgain the case was eliminated for 04.04.2016 and posted for hearing on 25.04.2016 due to excess cases, which clearly shows the Govt is playing tactics. Comrades please take some urgent steps before implementation of 7th CPC.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete