Very sad that the Supreme Court has found it inappropriate to interfere in the MACP scheme and has left it to the wisdom of DOPT. I fail to understand then as to why did the same Supreme Court changed the date of implementation of the MACP scheme from 1.9.2008 to 1.1.2006 for Defence personnel, when the Government had already accepted the MACP scheme and its implementation, wasn't it interference?
The court has ignored the drawbacks of Macp and not mentioned in the judgement. Staff side should file review petition by highlighting Macp drawbacks and it's consequences of resulting financial loss to the affected employees. Thanks k p Singh Dehradun
The Supreme Court I feel has kneeled down to the powers that be, otherwise what is the counter to the High Courts observation that the MACP scheme cannot be worse than tha ACP scheme that it is replacing. At least the Supreme Court shold have allowed the aggrieved parties to opt for ACP scheme in place of MACP, that would have been more rationalistic. Or perhaps we failed to convince the court that MACP scheme is worse than the ACP.
The MACP is showing disparity among employees as under MACP a section of employees get pay fixed at promotional hierarchy grade pay and other section get their pay fixed at immediate next hierarchy which is not their promotional hierarchy. This discrimination and disparity was not put up by staff side in the apex court by quoting "disparity in pay fixation while MACP is granted. As the pay fixation under MACP shows disparity, MACP must either be scraped or suitably rectified to resolve anomaly of long pending, j
Very good judgement, we are still in British Raj, every one understood that MACP is not appropriate but they can not take the right decision as they do not back bone, they are purchased. Anonymous
It's unfortunate that the genuine and bonafide issue of common employees of the central government is not found fit to be considered by Hon'ble court. We can laugh or cry don't know. But certainly say that justice is not done.
The Steering Committee may take appropriate lawful actions at the earliest so that suffering employees get justice as early as possible.
Please refer to point nos. 50-52 of the judgement. It is clear that Hon'ble court have pronounced against its on orders i.e. "Equal Pay for Equal Work" and other judgements which said the Junior can't be paid more than the seniors etc. Due to this MACP same doctrine of Equal Pay for Equal Work and other are not honoured. I had quoted the case of the National Museum, Ministry of Culture Government of India. It seems that was not placed on record despite our request before the court. The case of the National Museum Assistant Curators are glaring example and similar could be available in other ministers & departments. Hon'ble court said that nothing is placed before them that MACP is having error. Dear leaders of this case please appeal against this judgement as fast as possible and ask the support of suffering employees and engage the advocate of repute.
The Hon'ble Court did not go into rationality of grant of financial upgradation to hierarchy of grade pay. It chose not to interfere with Govt. policy as it "would have serious impact on the public exchequer". Some justice we got after so many years of fight.
Very sad state of affairs. How to convince the Judges for our genuine demand? Why the judges are not convinced with ourside arguments? I read in a magazine that the Chairman of the Pay Commission has himself felt sorry for wrongly fixing the emoulments of the lower grade staff after the implementation of the CPC, as he received lot of adverse comments for his wrong doing. Hence, our claim is a genuine demand and atleast in our Review Petition we should get our judgement positively. One thing is strange, since Govt only modified the ACP and brought the MACP, now the Court is saying DoPT may take decision. Whether DoPT and Govt are different?.
The Poor Group C employees are being denied the JUSTICE. The Politicians are taking home Salary of 10-15 times the Salary of Group C employees, but not giving any quality work as that of Group C Employees. The 90% most important ground works of Establishment & Accounts matters are being done by the Group C employees, yet they are being denied a genuine demand of MACP Financial Upgradation on Promotional Hierarchy by the highest COURT. BAD LUCK. NO JUSTICE IN INDIA.
JUDGEMENT IS AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF POWER OF ADMINISTRATION--- "would have serious impact on the public exchequer"." This order /judgement is looked as Savior of anti poor employee administrative system. Law and basic of welfare state and Fundamental Rights are not looked into. Also vague last few para of the judgement.No binding on government to settle the case in time bound banner. Is jurisprudence is visible in this order ? Ha Haa Haaaaa
Very sad that the Supreme Court has found it inappropriate to interfere in the MACP scheme and has left it to the wisdom of DOPT. I fail to understand then as to why did the same Supreme Court changed the date of implementation of the MACP scheme from 1.9.2008 to 1.1.2006 for Defence personnel, when the Government had already accepted the MACP scheme and its implementation, wasn't it interference?
ReplyDeleteThey are DOPT Judge, So not concerned of lower employee.
ReplyDeleteThe court has ignored the drawbacks of Macp and not mentioned in the judgement. Staff side should file review petition by highlighting Macp drawbacks and it's consequences of resulting financial loss to the affected employees. Thanks k p Singh Dehradun
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court I feel has kneeled down to the powers that be, otherwise what is the counter to the High Courts observation that the MACP scheme cannot be worse than tha ACP scheme that it is replacing. At least the Supreme Court shold have allowed the aggrieved parties to opt for ACP scheme in place of MACP, that would have been more rationalistic. Or perhaps we failed to convince the court that MACP scheme is worse than the ACP.
ReplyDeleteThe MACP is showing disparity among employees as under MACP a section of employees get pay fixed at promotional hierarchy grade pay and other section get their pay fixed at immediate next hierarchy which is not their promotional hierarchy. This discrimination and disparity was not put up by staff side in the apex court by quoting "disparity in pay fixation while MACP is granted. As the pay fixation under MACP shows disparity, MACP must either be scraped or suitably rectified to resolve anomaly of long pending,
ReplyDeletej
Very good judgement, we are still in British Raj, every one understood that MACP is not appropriate but they can not take the right decision as they do not back bone, they are purchased.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Staff unions should unite to finance review petitioners to file petition in Supreme court in Macp case to get justice
ReplyDeleteStaff unions should unite to finance individual petitioners to file review petition in Supreme court,in Macp case, in the interest of justice.
ReplyDeleteIt's unfortunate that the genuine and bonafide issue of common employees of the central government is not found fit to be considered by Hon'ble court.
ReplyDeleteWe can laugh or cry don't know. But certainly say that justice is not done.
The Steering Committee may take appropriate lawful actions at the earliest so that suffering employees get justice as early as possible.
Please refer to point nos. 50-52 of the judgement. It is clear that Hon'ble court have pronounced against its on orders i.e. "Equal Pay for Equal Work" and other judgements which said the Junior can't be paid more than the seniors etc. Due to this MACP same doctrine of Equal Pay for Equal Work and other are not honoured. I had quoted the case of the National Museum, Ministry of Culture Government of India. It seems that was not placed on record despite our request before the court. The case of the National Museum Assistant Curators are glaring example and similar could be available in other ministers & departments. Hon'ble court said that nothing is placed before them that MACP is having error.
ReplyDeleteDear leaders of this case please appeal against this judgement as fast as possible and ask the support of suffering employees and engage the advocate of repute.
The Hon'ble Court did not go into rationality of grant of financial upgradation to hierarchy of grade pay. It chose not to interfere with Govt. policy as it "would have serious impact on the public exchequer". Some justice we got after so many years of fight.
ReplyDeleteVery sad state of affairs. How to convince the Judges for our genuine demand? Why the judges are not convinced with ourside arguments? I read in a magazine that the Chairman of the Pay Commission has himself felt sorry for wrongly fixing the emoulments of the lower grade staff after the implementation of the CPC, as he received lot of adverse comments for his wrong doing. Hence, our claim is a genuine demand and atleast in our Review Petition we should get our judgement positively. One thing is strange, since Govt only modified the ACP and brought the MACP, now the Court is saying DoPT may take decision. Whether DoPT and Govt are different?.
ReplyDeleteThe Poor Group C employees are being denied the JUSTICE. The Politicians are taking home Salary of 10-15 times the Salary of Group C employees, but not giving any quality work as that of Group C Employees. The 90% most important ground works of Establishment & Accounts matters are being done by the Group C employees, yet they are being denied a genuine demand of MACP Financial Upgradation on Promotional Hierarchy by the highest COURT. BAD LUCK. NO JUSTICE IN INDIA.
ReplyDeleteJUDGEMENT IS AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF POWER OF ADMINISTRATION--- "would have serious impact on the public exchequer"." This order /judgement is looked as Savior of anti poor employee administrative system. Law and basic of welfare state and Fundamental Rights are not looked into. Also vague last few para of the judgement.No binding on government to settle the case in time bound banner. Is jurisprudence is visible in this order ? Ha Haa Haaaaa
ReplyDelete