GRANTING MACP ON PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY-CASE NO. 988 OF 2014, MA NO. 872 OF 2014
OA No.988 of 2014
MA No.872 of 2014
New Delhi, this
the 21st day of March, 2014
HONBLE SHRI G. GEORGE
PARACKEN, MEMBER (J)
HONBLE SHRI SHEKHAR
AGARWAL, MEMBER (A)
1. Pradeep Kumar, AE (C)
S/o Sh. Mahatma Singh,
R/o Flat No.115, Plot No.29,
Swastik Kunj, Sector-13,
2. Mulkh Raj, AE (C)-P
S/o Sh. Ram Rakha,
100/18, Deol Nagar,
Nakodar Road, Jallandhar,
3. Ashok Kumar Doharey, AE (C)-P,
S/o Shri Late Prasad Dohare,
R/o Flat No.494, Sector-E/2,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070.
4. Prakesh Singh, AE (C)-P,
s/o Sh. Pat Ram Singh,
R/o H.No.149A, Dilshad Garden,
5. P.K. Gupta, AE (C)-P,
S/o Late Shri Viswanath Prasad,
R/o Chhoti Khagaul, Near Haveli,
Khogaul, Patna 801105.
6. A. Kalam, AE (C)-P,
S/o Sh. Abdul Hafiz,
R/o 19/10, Sector-1,
Pushp Vihar, M.B. Road,
7. Manoj Kumar, AE (C)-P,
S/o Sh. Rameshwar Sinha,
R/o Q. No.1348, Type-IV, Sector-12,
R.K. Puram, New Delhi-110022.
8. Kedar Mandal, AE (C)-P,
S/o Late Sh. Sukdeo Mandal,
R/o Chanakya Vihar Colony,
Barari, P.O. Barai, Distt. Bhagalpur,
9. S.K. Sharma, AE (C)-P,
s/o Late Shri L.P. Verma,
R/o 149/8, Dr. Gupta Market,
Flat No.301, Kishangarh,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-70.
10. R.B. Singh, AE (C)-P,
s/o Late Sh. Raja Ram Singh,
R/o Karanpur, PO Bariya,
Distt. Patna, Bihar,
11. S. Khan, AE (C)-P,
S/o late Sh. Rashid Khanr,
Flat No.301, Zeenat Apartment,
Sama Pura, Rajabazar,
12. D.P. Sharma, AE (C)-P8
S/o late Shri Ram Kuber Singh,
R/o Q. No.136, Type-IV, Sector-3,
Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi-49.
13. Sh. S. Khalko, AE (C)-P8
S/o late Sh. Ahlad Khalko,
R/o Vill. Chtarkota, (Barkotol),
P.O. Pali, PS- Ratu,
14. Ajay Sahdev, AE (C)-P8
S/o Late Sh. O.P. Sahdev,
R/o H.No.B-111, Sector-30,
1st Floor, Noida-201301.
15. R.R. Gupta, AE (C)-P8
S/o Late Sh. Ram Bachan Gupta,
R/o Nain Bhawan, Kilburn Colony,
P.O. Binoo, Ranchi, Jharkhand-834002.
16. Deepak Gupta, AE (C)-P8
S/o Sh. I.C. Gupta,
R/o Flat No.12, Shubham Apartment,
Plot No.37, I.P. Ext. Patparganj,
17. D.S. Deswal, AE (C)-P8
S/o Sh. Mehar Singh Deswal,
R/o 1284, Sector-45, Gurgaon,
18. D.K. Pandit, AE (C)-P8
s/o Late Shri Ram Mulan Pandit,
R/o Q. No.N-198, Type-IV, Sector-8,
R.K. Puram, New Delhi-22.
19. Parveen Sharma, AE (C)-P8
S/o Sh. Om Parkash Sharma,
R/o H.No. 164, Pkt-E-18,
Sector-3, Rohini, Delhi.
20. R.C. Chaturvedi, AE (C)-P8
s/o late Shri Lalmani Chaturvedi,
R/o A-293, Gali No.11, West Vinod Kumar,
21. Paramjet Singh, AE (C)-P8
S/o Sh. Gurumukh Singh,
r/o 11/1403, Malviya Nagar,
(By Advocate :
Shri M.K. Bhardwaj)
Ministry of Information
Shastri Bhawan, New
2. The Director General,
All India Radio, Sansad
3. The Chief Engineer (Civil),
Wing, AIR, Soochna Bhawan,
SHRI G. GEORGE PARACKEN, MEMBER (J) :
has been filed by the applicants under Rule 4 (5) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules,
1987 seeking permission of this Tribunal to join together in a single Original
2. For the
reasons stated therein, this MA is allowed.
OA No.988 of 2014
The applicants in this Original Application are aggrieved by
the alleged arbitrary and discriminatory action of the respondents in not
granting them the scale of pay of Rs.15600-39100 with Grades Pay of Rs.6600/-
and 7600/- as 2nd and 3rd financial upgradations under MACP Scheme from due
dates, as given to similarly placed persons/counterparts who were appointed as
JE (Civil/Electrical) by following the same method of recruitment and the same
rules as applicable to them. They have, therefore, made several representations
to the Respondents to grant them also the same benefits but the Respondents
have not considered them so far.
have, therefore, filed this OA seeking the following reliefs:-
(a) To declare
the action of the respondents in not granting the scale of Rs.15600-39100
(PB-3) with Grade Pay of Rs.6600 & 7600 as given to similarly placed
persons vide order dated 25.10.2013 to the applicants as illegal and arbitrary.
(b) To direct
the respondents to grant scale of Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600 & 7600 as 2nd & 3rd financial
upgradation to the applicants under MACP from due date with all arrears of pay.
declare the OM/MACP dated 19.05.2009 as unconstitutional to the extent the same
deny the next promotional scale attached to the promotion post as 1st, 2nd
& 3rd financial upgradation as illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.
to the Applicants, the case is squarely covered by an Order of the Chandigarh
Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No.1038/CH/2010
Rajpal son of Shri Tilak Ram v. Union of India & others where it was
held as under:-
11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
considered the documents on record.
12. There is no dispute that the applicant is holding the
post of Photocopier, which is an isolated post, having no avenues for promotion. It is also not disputed that the post held by
the applicant had been declared equivalent to the post of LDC/Hindi Typist etc.
by the Tribunal as well as the High Court by judicial pronouncements in matters
of grant of ACP, which have attained finality and stands implemented also. Accordingly, applicant was granted Ist ACP
(under the old ACP) w.e.f. 9.8.99 in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000.
13. It has also been settled that the ACP would be granted on completion of the required years
of service in the hierarchy of posts for the posts of LDC/Hindi Typists, and
not in the next higher scale in the recommended scales. The same principle would have to be
applicable in regard to grant of MACP to
the applicant. The only difference is
that while in case of ACP two financial
upgradations were granted on completion
of 12 and 24 years of service, in case of MACP, three upgradations on intervals
of 10, 20 and 30 years of service.
respondents have placed reliance on para 13 of the MACPS, which reads as under:
13. Existing time-bound promotion scheme, including insitu
promotion scheme, Staff Car Driver Scheme or any other kind of promotion scheme
existing for a particular category of employees in a Ministry/Department or its
offices, may continue to be operational for the concerned category of employees
if it is decided by the concerned administrative authorities to retain such
Schemes, after necessary consultations or they may switch-over to the
MACPS. However, these Schemes shall not
run concurrently with the MACPS.
Reliance has further been placed on decision
taken in the second meeting of
the Joint Committee on MACPS held under the Chairmanship of the joint
Secretary DoPT was circulated. Item No.3 of the Agenda for the said meeting
reads as under:
The MACP Scheme provides for placement in the immediate next
higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands and
grade pay after 10,20 and 30 years of service.
On the other hand the earlier ACP Scheme provided for placement to
higher pay scale of the next promotion post in the hierarchy of the pay scale
after 12 and 24 years of service taken from date of induction in service.
15. Be that as it may, the principle enunciated and settled
by the Tribunal/High Court for grant of ACP
cannot be changed and the same
principle would apply for grant of MACP to him. The only difference is of number of years required to be
completed. We find no justification to
take a different view in the matter
16. For the
foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 9.8.2010, (Annexure A-1)qua the
applicant, fixing his pay in PB-1 with grade pay of FR 2400/- under the second
MACP, and the order dated 10.8.2010 (Annexure A-2 ) are hereby quashed
and set aside. Consequently, the respondents are directed to grant second
financial upgradation to the
applicant under the MACPS
from due date fixing his pay
in the hierarchy of posts decided in his case earlier and to pay the
resultant arrears without interest, within a period of 2 months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order.
17. The OA stands
disposed of in the above terms. No
respondents have challenged the aforesaid order before the Honble High Court of
Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP NO.19387/2011 decided on 19.10.2011.
The Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that there was
no infirmity in the aforesaid order passed by the Chandigarh Bench of this
Tribunal. The relevant observations of the said order are extracted hereunder:
Upon implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission, the
scale of Rs.3050-4590/- was kept in pay band-I, Rs.5,200-20,200/- with grade pay of Rs.1,900/-, the scale of
Rs.4,000-6,000/- was also kept in pay band-I with grade pay of Rs.2,400/- and
the scale of Rs.5,500/-9,000/- was kept in pay band-II in pay scale of
Rs.9,300-34,800/- with grace pay of Rs.4,200/- increased to Rs.4,600/-. In
terms of MACP Scheme, respondent no.1 was granted the lower scale by keeping in
pay band I of Rs.5,200-20,200/- with grade pay of Rs.2,400/-. This was done in terms of order dated
09.08.2010. Accordingly, respondent No.1
approached the CAT contending that he is entitled to be granted the scale of
Rs.5,500-9000/- towards the 2nd Financial Upgradation at par with the post of
Hind Typist and LDC. Such claim of
respondent No.1 has been upheld by the CAT in the impugned order dated
5. Later on
the Honble Supreme Court has also dismissed the petition(s) for Special Leave
to Appeal (Civil) (CC No.7467/2013) filed by the Government and upheld the
judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP No.19387/2011 (supra).
learned counsel for Applicants has also submitted that this Bench allowed O.A.
No.904/2012 Sanjay Kumar, UDC & others v. Union of India & others vide
order dated 26.11.2012 following the directions given by the Chandigarh Bench.
The relevant part of the said Order reads as under:-
7. In our
considered view, the present OA is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment
of Chandigarh Bench, as upheld by the Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana
8. In fact,
the respondents have wrongly interpreted the terms and conditions mentioned in
the MACP Scheme, issued by the Deptt. of Personnel & Training, in the case
of the applicants. By the said Scheme, the eligible government servants are to
be placed in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended
revised pay bands and grade pay and not merely in the next higher scale of pay
as per the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. In the hierarchy after the scale of UDC, the
next scale is that of Assistant. Therefore, the respondents should have given
the next higher grade pay and pay band attached to the next promotional
post in the hierarchy, namely, the
Assistants carrying the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 and the grade of Rs.4200/-.
9. In view
of the above position, this OA is allowed. The respondents are directed to
grant scale of pay of Rs.9300-34,800/- with grade pay of Rs.4200/- attached to
the said promotional post of Assistant/OS from the due date to the applicants.
aforesaid directions shall be complied with within the period of two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the other
conditions mentioned in the MACP Scheme.
another O.A. No.864/2014 Shri Om Prakash
& others v. Secretary (NCERT) decided by this Tribunal, the following
directions were issued:-
3. In our
considered view, once an order has been passed by this Tribunal and it has also
been upheld at the level of the Supreme Court, there is no question of waiting
for an approval from any Govt. department for implementation of the same. The
respondents, therefore, should have considered the representations of the
applicants on merits.
4. In view
of the above position, we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with
the direction to the respondents to consider the representations of the
applicants in the light of the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP
No.19387/2011 (supra) as upheld by the Apex Court in SLP (CC)
No.7467/2013(supra) and decide their cases under intimation to them. The
aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
8. In view
of the above position, we dispose of this Original Application with the same
directions as given by us in O.A. No.864/2014 (supra). There shall be no order
as to costs.
(SHEKHAR AGARWAL) (G. GEORGE PARACKEN)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)