Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
28323W/2012 on 13 March, 2014
Author: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
Bench: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
1
3.03.2014..
Sl. No. 6
aks
W. P. 28323 (W) of 2012
Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal)
.. for the petitioner.
Mr. Pratip Kumar Chatterjee
.. for the respondent nos. 1 and 3.
Let the affidavit in opposition filed in court today by the respondents be kept with the record.
The petitioner joined the Central Industrial Security Force on September 6, 1975 as a constable. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on May 31, 2013.
His grievance is that in spite of putting in 36 years of service, he did not get any promotion but in the defence sector, all employees have a Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP) and get their chances of promotion after 10, 6, 20 and 30 years of service.
The petitioner's case was considered for the first Assured Career Progression Scheme but he was not found eligible. After the introduction of the MACP Scheme, he was found eligible but for the second MACP he was not considered eligible as the first MACP was delayed. By a communication dated October 8/9, 2012 the petitioner was informed by the Assistant Commandant, CISF Unit HDC Haldia that since the first MACP was granted to him with effect from January 1, 2010, i.e, after a delay of 10 tears 4 months 22 days, he was not eligible for the second MACP at present due to delay in granting of first MACP. The petitioner has challenged the said decision and has naturally prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to cancel the said communication and to grant him send MACP on the basis of the recommendation of the 6th Central Pay Commission and for other reliefs.
2The respondents have opposed this application by filing an affidavit in opposition to which for the present we need not make any detailed reference for the reason mentioned below.
At the hearing of this petition, Ms. Pampa Dey (Dhabal), learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioner had produced a circular no. 01 of 2014 issued by the CISF. She has drawn my attention to the relevant provisions of the circular which, inter alia, says that qualifying in PCC and the attaining SHAPE -I medical categorization were, inter alia, the pre-requisites for granting financial upgradation under the MACP and it has also been provided that the screening committee will continue to assess the fitness of individual in accordance with the present system of marking as conveyed in the circular referred to therein and all sectors were requested to review the MACP cases in the light of the circular produced in court by the petitioner.
The petitioner submits that in view of the altered stand taken by the respondents as reflected in the circular, the petitioner's grievances are, to a very large extent, satisfied. She, therefore, prays for a direction upon the respondent to consider her case in terms of the circular.
Mr. Chatterjee, learned Advocate, appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 3 has no objection to it and agrees that if such direction is passed, the respondents shall consider it in accordance with law and the circular prevailing on the date.
In such view of it, I dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent no. 2 to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the circular dated January 8, 2014. The impugned communication dated October 8/9, 2012, inter alia, is set aside and I give liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation in the light of the latest circular within a period of six weeks from date of the communication of the order and in case, such representation is made, the respondent no. 2 shall consider the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.
It is expected that the respondent no. 2 shall dispose of the representation without being influenced by the earlier stand.
3It is, however, made clear that this order shall not be construed as an expression of any opinion by this court on the merit of the claims of the petitioner or otherwise. The said respondent shall independently decide the same strictly in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Let the copy of the circular produced in court be kept with the record.
( Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J.)