Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Laxmi Narayan Saxena Son Of Late Man ... vs Union Of India Through The Secretary on 29 April, 2015
RESERVED On 24.02.2015 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD (Circuit Bench at Nainital) (This the 29th day of April, 2015) Honble Dr. Murtaza Ali JM Honble Mr. U.K. Bansal- AM Original Application No. 331/00013 of 2014 (U/S 19, Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985) 1. Laxmi Narayan Saxena son of Late Man Mohan Lal Saxena, R/o B-13/8, New Type II OFD Estate, Raipur Dehradun UK 248008 (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 251, P No. 501314). 2. Manjul Sharma son of late H.C. Sharma R/o 3, Hari Sadan, Mukti Dham, Swarg Ashram, Rishikesh, Pauri Garhwal, UK 249304 (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 259 P No. 501326. 3. Devendra Singh Payal son of Late Shankar Singh Payal, R/o C-15/18, Type III Ordnance Factory Estate, Raipur Dehradun UK 248008 (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 26, P No. 501326 4. Kuldeep Rana son of Late K.S. Rana, R/o 247, Sunder Wala, PO. Raipur Dehradun 248008, (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 24, P No. 501342) 5. Rajeev Kumar Rathor, S/o Virendra Pal Rathor, R/o 6/1, Ekta Enclave, P.O. Nehrugram Nathanpur, Dehradun UK 248005. (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 242P No. 501343). 6. Mukul Kumar S/o Virendra Kumar R/o B-11/2, OFD Estate, Raipur Dehradun UK 248008 (Presently posted as Examiner (E) T. NO. MCP QCR 19, P No. 501346). 7. Neeraj Kant Tyagi son of Budha Singh Tyagi, R/o B-6, Shasthripuram, (Kalpana Vihar I), Aamwala Tarala Dehradun, UK 248008 (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 91, P No. 501362). 8. Sushil Kumar Dhiman S/o PL Dhiman R/o 105/1, Bhandari Bagh, Vishwakarama Colony, Dehradun UK 248001, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. AFCS 38, P No. 501361). 9. Vinay Narang son of J.C. Narang, R/o 56, Saraswati Vihar, Adhoiwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 90, P No. 501361). 10. Manoj Mehrotra son of R.C. Mehrotra, R/o A-39, Shivlok Colony, near Kali Mandir, Raipur Road, Dehradun (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 97, P No. 501368). 11. S.S. Raza Naqvi son of S.N Nayyar Raza Naqvi R/o 27/10, Sanjay Colony, Inder Road, Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 92, P No. 501363). 12. Ajay Singh Verma son of Late P.S. Verma, R/o Shahid Dhirendra Bist Marg, Opp. Durg Mandir, Kidduwala, Raipur, Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Elect. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 61, P No. 501338). 13. Sunil Kumar son of Mahidhar Prasad, R/o B-11/12, Type II OFD Estate, Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 95, P No. 501366). 14. Yogesh Kumar Panchal son of S.K. Panchal R/o 91, Dharmpur II, Dehradun, UK 248001, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 77, P No. 501322). 15. Dinesh Dass son of Late D.D. Ram, R/o Q 81/2, New Area OFD Estate, Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 72, P No. 501339). 16. Rajeev Sharma son of Late C.P. Sharma R/o H. No. 73, Raipur, Post Office Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. FCS 39, P No. 501365). 17. Manoj Karki son of Omkar Singh Karki, R/o Village/post Office Bhallawal, near OBC Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. AFCS 37, P No. 501366). 18. Bhuvnesh Nautiyal son of Late Sri Ram Nautiyal R/o Lane NO.7, Ekta Vihar, Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun UK 248001, (Presently posted as Examiner Opt. Skilled. T. NO. QCO 05, P No. 501345). 19. Mahendra Kumar Dhasmana son of Late C.L. Dhasmana, R/o C-2/7, New Type III OFD Estate, Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008, (Presently posted as MachinistSkilled. T. NO. O-209, P No. 501344). 20. Om Prakash Thakare son of Uday Ram Thakare, R/o 23, New Friends Colony, Ajabpur Kalan, Bye Pass Road, Dehradun UK 248001, (Presently posted as Examiner Opt. Skilled. T. NO. QCO 04, P No. 501325). 21. Sanjay Juyal son of Late S.K. Juyal, R/o 97-F, Neshvilla Road, Dehradun UK 248001, (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. FCS -26, P No. 501320). 22. Ramesh Kumar son of Itwari Lal R/o Village Choila Chandar Bani, P.O. Mohabe Wala, Dehradun UK (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 255, P No. 501318). 23. Harpal Singh son of Sher Singh, R/o 176-A, Rishi Nagar, Sahstra Dhara Road, Adohiwala, Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Elect. Skilled. T. NO. EPS 13, P No. 501353). 24. Subrat Sen son of S.R. Sen, R/o 14/B, Shivlok Colony, Raipur Road, Dehradun UK (Presently posted as Fitter Gen. Skilled. T. NO. MSD 05, P No. 501373). 25. Vinesh Kumar Tyagi son of S.S. Tyagi R/o C-28/08, OFD Estate Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008 (Presently posted as Fitter Gen. Skilled. T. NO. MSD 06, P No. 501340). 26. Mahendra Pal Singh Son of Santosh Singh, R/o Ishwar Vihar Phase I, H. NO. 37, Sunderwala, Near Shivalik School, Raipur, Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. MCP 247, P No. 501310). 27. Mrs. Geetika Panwar, D/o Late S.L. Verma W/o Ajay Singh Panwar, R/o Shahid Dhirendra Bist Marg. Opp. Durga Mandir, Kidduwala, Raipur Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Elect. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 82, P No. 501351). 28. Ajay Singh Panwar son of R.C. Singh, R/o Shahid Dhirendra Bist Marg. Opp. Durga Mandir, Kidduwala, Raipur Dehradun, UK (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. AFCS 35, P No. 501358). 29. Anil Kumar son of Babu Lal, R/o B-2/11, New Type II OFD Estate Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008 (Presently posted as Fitter Elect. Skilled. AFCS 10, P No. 501348). 30. Ramakant Chandola son of Late S.N. Chandola, R/o 157, Khurbura, Mohalla Dehradun, UK 248001, (Presently posted as Examiner (E) Skilled. T. NO. QCF 07, P No. 501315). 31. Harinder Singh Malik son of Late Vijay Pal Singh, R/o Q 79/1, OFD Estate Raipur, Dehradun UK 248008 (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. FCS 36, P No. 501359). 32. Naveen Prakash son of Late son of Prakash R/o Pragati Vihar, Lower Adhoiwala, Dehradun, UK 248001, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-II 78, P No. 501323). 33. Madan Singh Panwar son of Beer Singh Panwar, R/o Village Kalimati, P.O. Dhariyari (Badasi), Via- Raipur, Dehradun U.K. (Presently posted as Machinist Skilled. T. NO. EPS 28, P No. 501327). 34. Daleep Kumar son of Virendra Lal R/o H NO. 45 Shastripuram, Tarla Aamwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun UK (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. EPS 27, P No. 501367). 35. Mrs. Sarla Panchal D/o Late KML Sharma W/o Yogesh Kumar Panchal R/o 91, Dharmpur II, Dehradun U.K. (Presently posted as Fitter Elect. Skilled. T. NO. EPS 23, P No. 501321). 36. Laxmi Prasad son of Mukund Ram R/o C-25/14, OFD Estate Raipur Dehradun UK 248008, (Presently posted as Fitter Inst. Skilled. T. NO. A-I 01, P No. 501355). 37. Suresh Babu son of Late Dulare R/o C/o Rupesh Pal near Kanya Pathshala, Raipur, Dehradun, UK 248008(Presently posted as Turner Skilled. T. NO. MCP 263, P No. 501330). 38. Anil Badola Son of S.D. Badola R/o Lane -7 B, Nehru Gram Garhwali Colony, Raipur Dehradun, UK 248008 (Presently posted as Examiner (E) Skilled. T. NO. QCR -22, P No. 501311). All the applicants are presently working under respondent NO. 5. . Applicants By Advocate: Shri S.K Pandey Versus 1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence (Department of Production), New Delhi. 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension (Department of Personnel and Training), North Block New Delhi. 3. Director General Ordnance Factories, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, Ordnance Factories Board, 10-A, Shahid Khudi Ram Bose Kolkata 700001. 4. Additional Director General, Armed Vehicle Headquarter Avadi Chennai (Madras). 5. General Manager, Opto Electronics Factory, Raipur, Dehradun 248008. .. . Respondents By Advocate: Shri S. Srivastava/Shri Neeraj Mishra O R D E R
By Honble Mr. U.K. Bansal- AM The applicants herein are working as skilled employees in the Industrial Establishment of respondent No. 5 Opto Electronics Factory, Raipur, Dehradun in the Ministry of Defence. They have been granted 1st Financial Upgradation from the Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- to Grade Pay of Rs.2000/- after completion of 10 years of service under the M.A.C.P. Scheme. It is their contention that they should legally be allowed to be upgraded to the Grade Pay of Rs.2400/- in this 1st Financial Upgradation and not in the Grade Pay of Rs.2000.
2. In support of their contentions, the applicants claim that similar controversies have been settled by different Benches of this Honble Tribunal as also the Honble High Courts. They have also mentioned that this claim has been put forward by the applicants individually and through Union/Federation before the Competent Authorities including the National Anomalies Committee and the DOPT but no final decision has been taken so far.
3. While making their submissions, the applicants have stated that MoD had directed a restructuring of cadre of Artisan staff vide a Circular dated 14.6.2010. This restructuring came into effect from 01.01.2006. The relevant extract of this Circular is reproduced below:-
(2) The grade structure in the industrial as well as in the non industrial trades, wherever already available and the pay scale of the Defence artisan staff shall stand modify with effect from 01.01.2006 as under:-
Sl. NO. Grade Pay band Grade pay
1.
Skilled PB-1 Rs.5200-20200 Rs.1900/-
II Highly Skilled Grade II PB-1, Rs.5200-20200 Rs.2400/-
III Highly Skilled Grade-1 PB -1 Rs.5200-20200 Rs.2800/-
IV Master Craftsman PB 2 Rs.9300-34800 Rs.4200/-
4. Drawing from this restructuring, it is claimed that the next promotional hierarchy for skilled workers such as the applicants is Highly Skilled Grade II in the Grade Pay of Rs.2400/- and there is no post for the applicants, in between, carrying the Grade Pay of Rs.2000/-. Hence, the respondents have erred in granting the 1st Financial Upgradation of Grade Pay of Rs.2000/- whereas a post of such Grade Pay does not exist in the restructured hierarchy of the applicants. A reference has also been made to a clarification issued by the respondent NO. 5 on 10.9.2003 regarding grant of ACP-1 to skilled employees.
5. It has further been submitted that the DOPT being cognizant of this grave anomaly had collected relevant informations from the respondents vide their OM dated 5.5.2011 but no decision has yet been taken in this matter by the Competent Authorities. The central argument of the applicant herein is that the grant of financial upgradation to the Grade Pay of Rs.2000/- is untenable as this Grade Pay does not exist in the promotional hierarchy of the pay scale/pay band of the applicants. Since the existing terms and conditions of the service cannot be altered to the detriment of the employee, the present action of the respondents is illegal and hence the applicants are entitled to the Grade Pay existing in the next promotional post in their own hierarchy i.e. Rs.2400/-.
6. The applicants have placed reliance on the orders of various Coordinate Benches of this Honble Tribunal in Original Applications filed for similar causes (Para 4.11 of the O.A.). The applicants have also highlighted that their grievances have been represented before Joint Secretary in DOPT, Govt. of India on 18.2.2014 by Bharati Pratiraksha Mazdor Sangh but no decision has been taken so far.
7. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents where the hierarchal structure applicable to the applicants has been given, as reproduced below:-
Sl.
Grade Pre-revised pay scale (IVth CPC before 01.01.1996) Revised Pay scale (Vth CPC from 01.01.1996) Revised pay scale (Vth CPC- from 01.01.2006)
(a).
Semi Skilled Rs.800-15-1010-EB-20-1150/-
Rs.2650-65-3300-70-4000/-
Pay Band 1 (Rs.5200-20200) GP Rs. 1800/-
(b) Skilled Rs.950-20-1150-EB-25-1500/-
Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590 Pay Band 1 (Rs.5200-20200) GP Rs.1900/-
(c) Highly skilled Grade II Rs.1200-301440-EB-30-1800/-
Rs.4000-100-6000 (Highly Skilled) Pay Band I (Rs. 5200-20200)GP) Rs.2400/-
(d) Highly Skilled Grade I Rs.1320-30-1500-EB-40-2040/-
Pay Band I (Rs.5200-20200) GP Rs.2800/-
(e) Master Craftsman Rs.1400-40-1800-EB-50-2300 Rs.4500-125-7000 (Placement) Pay Band 2 (Rs.9300-34800) GP Rs.4200/-
8. It is, therefore, uncontroverted that the promotion post in the hierarchy from skilled grade to highly skilled grade is HS-II carrying a Grade Pay of Rs.2400/-. Respondents have clarified that the erstwhile ACP Scheme, which was introduced w.e.f. 9.8.1999 was superseded by the modified ACP Scheme (M.A.C.P) w.e.f. 1.9.2008. This Scheme mandated the grant of three Financial Upgradations on the completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service. However, it was also stated clearly in the Scheme that these financial upgradations will be in the hierarchy of grade pay prescribed for M.A.C.P. and not in the promotional hierarchy. The respondents have also stated that non of the applicants had completed 12 years of stipulated service up to 31.8.2008 and hence were not eligible for consideration of 1st Financial Upgradation under the erstwhile A.C.P. Scheme. Had they completed 12 years, they would have been covered under the A.C.P. Scheme, which provided for upgradation to the grade pay of the next post in the promotional hierarchy and would have been eligible for the grade pay of Rs.2400/-. However, since they were covered by the M.A.C.P Scheme, which came into effect w.e.f. 1.9.2008 and since they completed 10 years of service under the M.A.C.P Scheme, hence they were granted 1st Financial Upgradation to the next grade pay of Rs.2000 from the date of completion of 10 years of service. This was done under the terms of extant instructions.
9. The respondents have also stated that the M.A.C.P. is an offshoot of the recommendations of 6th C.P.C. which is a body of experts constituted by the Government of India for considering, examining, analyzing and recommending revised scales of pay as well as revised scheme for betterment of Central Government Employees. The Scheme not only impacts the applicants herein but a vast number of other Central Government employees in various Govt. departments and hence the respondents insist that since the matter is under active consideration of concerned authorities, this Honble Tribunal should not intervene at this stage with the recommendations and consequent implementation made by a committee having expertise in this field.
10. The respondents have also submitted that the applicants are making selective and misleading references to judicial pronouncements (para 27 of the counter affidavit). The respondents claimed that a writ petition has been filed in the Honble High Court of New Delhi against the orders of Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi dated 30.8.2013, which has been prominently cited by the applicants in support of their averments. The status of this writ petition, however, has not been clarified. Reference has also been made to an order dated 18.9.2013 passed by C.A.T Bench of this Honble Tribunal disposing of 17 O.As.
11. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the applicants where the contents of the O.A have been reiterated and it has been emphasized that any post having grade pay of Rs.2000/- does not exist in the hierarchy of the post of the applicants. The rejoinder affidavit interestingly points out to the dilemma being faced by the respondents by quoting a letter issued by respondent NO.3 seeking clarifications/decisions from the MoD on the point of granting M.A.C.P in the higher grade pay of the promotional hierarchy (6(ii) of the rejoinder affidavit). In this letter, respondent NO.3 has made a reference to orders issued by the C.A.T. Chandigarh Bench in O.A. NO. 1038/2010 Tilak Ram Vs. UOI and Ors., which has been upheld by Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court in W.P. NO. 19387 of 2011 decided on 19.10.2011.
12. The averments made by the applicants in para 6 (iii) of their rejoinder affidavit are germane to the issue under consideration. The same is reproduced below:-
6(iii) That it is further submitted that National Council (Staff side) Joint Consultative Machinery for Central Government Employees requested the respondent NO.2 through its letter NC-JCM-2014/MACP dated 16.5.2014 for grant of Financial Up-gradation in the next promotional hierarchy as was given to the applicants of Original Application 1038/CH/2010 Raj Pal Yadav Vs. Union of India and others quoting the judgment and order given in the case of G.C. Ghose Vs. Union of India and others (1992) 19 ATC 94 SC. The aforesaid letter was written in response to the letter of BHARTIYA PRATIRAKSHA MAZDOOR SANGH dated 05.05.2014. It is further submitted here that in response to an application filed under the Right to Information Act, the respondent NO.2, in its reply dated 04.04.2014 stated that the department decided to implement the order dated 31.05.2011 of CAT Chandigarh Bench for grant of Financial Up-gradation in the promotional hierarchy under MACP to Shri Raj Pal on personal basis not to be treated as precedent. It is further submitted that the respondent NO.2 vide its letter dated 19.08.2013 informed the Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi that Matter was examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice and the establishment division of the department. It has been decided to implement the CATs Chandigarh Benchs order dated 31.5.2011 in the subject O.A. absolutely.
13. The applicants have also placed on record a number of judgments of various Honble High Court in favour of their claims (para 14 of the rejoinder affidavit).
14. Supplementary counter affidavit has also been filed where the averments made in the earlier counter affidavit have been repeated. It has been stated that the M.A.C.P. Scheme has been implemented by the respondents strictly as per Rules and Clarifications by the Government in this regard. In support thereof, the respondents have quoted the relevant para of D.O.P.T letter dated 19.05.2009 notifying the M.A.C.P Scheme, which is reproduced below;-
The MACPS, envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands and grade pay as given in Section, Part A of the first Scheme of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Thus, the grade pay at the time of financial upgradation under the MACPS can, in certain cases where regular promotion is not between two successive grades, be different than what is available at the time of regular promotion. In such cases, the higher grade pay attached to the next promotion post in the hierarchy of the concerned cadre/organization will be given only at the time of regular promotion.
15. It has been stated that the Headquarters of the applicants and Ministry of Defence are deeply concerned with the so called financial loss to the applicants vis-`-vis grant of M.A.C.P. but the M.A.C.P Scheme in its present form envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay band and grade pay and not in promotional hierarchy.
16. A supplementary rejoinder affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the applicants.
17. During the course of the arguments, the learned counsel on both sides argued largely on the lines of their pleadings. After careful examination of the documents on records and pleadings and carefully consideration of the arguments placed before us, we find that the main controversy involved herein is whether under the M.A.CP. scheme the 1st Financial Upgradation can be granted to a grade pay which does not even exist in the hierarchy of the cadre structure of the applicants. Admittedly, the grade pay of Rs.2000/- does not exist in the restructured hierarchy of the applicants cadre, which came into force since 1.1.2006. Any upgradation of skilled workers, as a consequence of normal promotion, would be in the grade pay of Rs.2400/- as highly skilled grade II. However, the anomaly has arisen out of para 2 of Annexure 1 of D.O.P.T letter No. 35034/3/2008-Estt. (D) dated 19.5.2009, which has already been reproduced earlier in this order a para 13. Another relevant para of the M.A.C.P scheme is also reproduced below:-
4. Benefit of pay fixation available at the time of regular promotion shall also be allowed at the time of financial upgradation under the Scheme. Therefore, the pay shall be raised by 3% of the total pay in the pay band and the grade pay drawn before such upgradation. There shall, however, be no further fixation of pay at the time of regular promotion if it is in the same grade pay as granted under MACPS. However, at the time of actual promotion if it happens to be in post carrying higher grade pay than what is available under MACPS, no pay fixation would be available and only difference of grade pay would be made available. To illustrate, in case a Government Servant joins as a direct recruit in the grade pay of Rs.1900 of PB-1 and he gets no promotion till completion of 10 years of service, he will be granted financial upgradation under MACPS in the next higher grade pay of Rs.2000 and his pay will be fixed by granting him one increment plus the difference of grade pay (i.e. Rs.100). After availing financial upgradation under MACPS, if the Government servant gets his regular promotion in the hierarchy of his cadre, which is to be grade of Rs.2400, on regular promotion, he will only be granted the difference of grade pay between Rs.2000 and Rs.2400. No additional increment will be granted at this stage.
18. We find that the respondents are fully cognizant of the alleged anomaly and the pecuniary disadvantage faced by the applicants in view of the applications of the M.A.C.P scheme for granting 1st Financial Upgradation in contrast with the advantage which would have accrued to them under the erstwhile A.C.P. Scheme. It is not possible to find fault with the interpretation and application of the existing M.A.CP Scheme by the respondents in the case of the applicants. We also take note of the fact that the M.A.C.P scheme has been crafted by a committee of experts specifically tasked by the Central Government in this regard and hence it is neither useful nor desirable to substitute their recommendations with any findings of this Court. However, it is also clear that the Ministry of Defence, D.O.P.T. and other respondents are responsible for the inordinate and inexplicable delay in resolving this issue even after over four years of consideration. The respondents have chosen to implement some orders of the Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal and Superior Courts on a case by case basis by giving benefits as directed by these judgments. This can hardly be an example of the working of a model employer. With their prevarication, the respondents have not only caused continuing distress of perceived financial loss to their employees such as the applicants but have also promoted a multiplicity of litigations.
19. In our considered view, the present O.A. is very similar in principle to O.A NO. 904 of 2012 decided by C.A.T. P.B New Delhi by an order dated 26.11.2012. While deciding that O.A., the Honble Principal Bench has discussed another similar O.A. considered by Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal namely O.A. NO. 103/03-88/2010 Rajpal S/o Tilak Ram Vs. Union of India and Ors. Honble Principal Bench has also taken note of the fact that the judgment of the Honble Chandigarh Bench has been upheld by the Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in C.W.P No. 19397/11 by the decision dated 19.10.2011. The ratio laid down by the Honble Principal Bench while deciding the O.A. NO. 904/2012 is the respondents should have given the next higher grade pay and pay band attached to the next promotional post in the hierarchy (para 8 of the order dated 26.11.2012). While upholding this decision of the Principal Bench, the Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana has observed as follows:-
The entire objective of the introduction of the A.C.P/M.A.C.P Scheme is to elevate stagnation as regards an employee, who has a number of regular years of service on the same post without any avenue of promotion. It is under such circumstances that a financial incentive is sought to be granted to an employee upon completion of a certain number of years of service of the same post. Under the A.C.P scheme of 1999, the financial upgradation were to be granted upon completion of 12 years and 24 years of regular service whereas under the M.A.C.P Scheme such financial upgradations are envisages upon completion of 10,20 and 30 years of service. The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner (employers) if accepted would defeat the very objectives for which such scheme have been introduced.
20. Since the respondents have failed to address the grievances of the applicants even after a protracted period of over four years, it is only legitimate for this Tribunal to intervene in the matter by allowing the O.A. The respondents are, accordingly, directed to grant the 1st Financial Upradation to the applicants in pay band-1 Rs.5200-20200 grade pay Rs.2400/- from the date that they have completed 10 years of regular service as prescribed under Rules. These directions shall be complied with within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order subject to other conditions mentioned in the M.A.C.P Scheme.
Member (A) Member (J)
Manish/-
??
??
??
??
13