Lekh Bahadur Rana And Ors vs Home Department on 7 October, 2015

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Lekh Bahadur Rana And Ors vs Home Department on 7 October, 2015

2. The grievance of the eleven petitioners who are serving JAP-I, Ranchi on the post of Havaldar, is that the benefit of 2nd MACP with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- has been reduced to Rs. 2800 by the respondents and excess salary has been withdrawn by the respondents. Therefore, petitioners have sought re-fixation of their pay scale in the revised scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200.

3. Initially, the affidavit of the Respondent No. 6 - Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police-I stated on instructions of the Home Department that the petitioners could only be entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs. 2800 on grant of 2 nd MACP and not that of Rs. 4200 which is available only to the next higher substantive post of Sub Inspector of Police. Accordingly, pay of the petitioner was reduced. Considering the aforesaid stand and the interplay of the Finance Department in the implementation of MACP Scheme, the respondent Finance Department was directed to file a counter affidavit.

4. It is the consistent stand of the respondent Finance Department, as brought 2. forth by way of affidavit, that the pay scale of a constable is that of Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs. 2000. On grant of the benefit of 1st MACP, they become entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs. 2400 and on grant of 2 nd MACP, they become entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs. 2800. The scheme of MACP entitles them to the next higher grade and does not entitle them to jump the grade pay.

5. Counsel for the petitioners, while assailing the impugned action, has sought to submit that the grant of benefit of MACP to the petitioners earlier on completion of twenty years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200 was perfectly justified and does not require any interference. Whether the MACP Scheme itself mandates grant of next higher grade pay only on grant of 1st or 2nd MACP, instead of grade pay of next substantive post in hierarchy, is something which has not been given considerable thought by the Finance Department and is required to be decided at their end in the first instance. Learned counsel has therefore assailed the impugned action and submitted that such reduction of grade pay by the respondents even after completion of twenty years of service of the petitioner, is harsh and arbitrary as well.

6. Counsel for the respondents while supporting their stand, have referred to the counter affidavit of the respondent Finance Department and the Resolution no. 2981 dated 01.09.2009 Para-2 of Appendix-1 which deals with such a eventuality. It is once again reiterated on their part that the Financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme will be given in immediate next higher grade pay as mentioned in Schedule-I of Resolution No. 660 dated 28.02.2009 issued by the Finance Department. The next higher grade pay admissible to the petitioners under the MACP Scheme is Rs. 2800.

7. I have considered the submissions of the parties in the light of the provisions of the MACP Scheme. There appears to be significant departure in the MACP Scheme. The relevant Para-2 of Appendix-1 of MACP Scheme inter-alia provides that upon grant of MACP, the incumbent would be placed on immediate 3. next higher grade pay in the hierarchy. This grade pay at the time of financial up- gradation under the MACP Scheme in certain cases where regular promotion is not between two successive grade pay, 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. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the next higher grade pay of Rs. 4200 is admissible only upon substantive promotion to the next higher post of Sub Inspector of Police in a particular scale of pay. These petitioners are working as Hawaldar and have got the benefit of 2nd MACP earlier in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200, though there is Grade Pay of Rs. 2800 in between under new recommended revised pay band and grade pay. Therefore, on instructions of the Home Department and also as per the stand of the respondent Finance Department, petitioners could only be legally entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs. 2800 on grant of 2nd MACP. Any correction in the grade pay of the petitioners undertaken by the respondents therefore, cannot be said to be erroneous in law or contrary to the MACP Scheme, which in any case is not under challenge.

8. In matters relating to fixation of pay, financial up-gradation, pay structure modalities are worked out through such a scheme which has to be followed uniformly amongst the similarly situated persons under a particular organization or concerned Government. If a departure is made from the said scheme in cases of one or the other person, then it will result in discrimination to several such similarly situated persons in other department or other cadre. Therefore, petitioners have not been able to make out a case that they are entitled to the grant of Rs. 4200 on grant of 2nd MACP. No relief can be granted in such circumstances to the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) Ranjeet/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court