Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway on 20 February, 2025
1 OA 318 of 2021
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH
OA No. 318 OF 2021
Reserved on : 18.02.2025 Pronounced on : 20.02.2025
Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Member (J) Hon'ble Mr. Pramod Kumar Das, Member (A)
1. Prasanna Kumar Mishra, aged about 59 years, S/o Late Prafulla Chandra Mishra, At Qrs No. D/4-S, Rail Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, at present working as Chief Traffic Inspector, Office of the Principal Chief Operations Manager, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar.
......Applicants VERSUS
1. Union of India represented through its General Manager, East Coast Railway, Rail Sadan, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist Khurda, Odisha.
2. Principal Chief Personnel Officer, East Coast Railway, Rail Sadan, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist Khurda.
......Respondents For the applicants : Mr. T Rath, counsel For the respondents: Mr R S Pattanaik, counsel 2 OA 318 of 2021 O R D E R Hon'bleMr.Pramod Kumar Das, A.M. The applicant challenging the order dated 23.07.2020 & 29.04.2021 wherein his prayer for 3rd MACP has been rejected has filed this OA praying for following reliefs:
1. Admit the original application;
2. Call for the records
3. (a) Quash the impugned order dated 23.07.2020 & 29.04.2021 passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Annexures A/8 & A/9 respectively, and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law being contrary to RBE No. 101/2009 dated 10.06.2009 and corresponding circular dated 29.12.2011 and dated 27.06.2014 and the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court under Annexure A/10 series & Annexure A/11 respectively.
(b) Further the respondents be accordingly directed to extend the 3 rd MACP scheme computing 30 (thirty) years of service of the applicant with effect from the date of initial appointment as ASM i.e. w.e.f. 01.08.1984 or as Traffic Apprentice w.e.f. 06.04.1990 (inclusive of training period) in terms of RBE No. 101/2009 and corresponding circular dated 29.12.2011 and dated 27.06.2014 and judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court under Annexure A/10 series & Annexure A/11 respectively with all other consequential service benefits within a reasonable time to be stipulated by the Hon'ble Tribunal.
(c) And also quash the clarifications under Annexure R/3 & R/7 and pass any other appropriate order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper keeping in view the fact and circumstances of the case.
3 OA 318 of 2021
2. The brief facts of the case as inter alia averred by the applicant is that he was appointed as Trainee ASM vide order dated 27.06.1984 and he joined on 01.08.1984. It is submitted that in pursuance to a fresh advertisement the applicant had applied for the post of Traffic Apprentice and an order of appointment was issued by the Office of Chief Personnel Officer, Kolkata vide order dated 23.08.1989. The applicant was however promoted in his previous job vide order dated 23.03.1990. It is submitted that vide order dated 21.03.1990, the applicant was directed by authorities to report at Garden Reach and after he was spared vide order dated 04.04.1990, the applicant joined at garden reach on 05.04.1990 and on the same day he was spared to join at ZTS/SINI. The applicant submitted his joining on 06.04.1990 at ZTS/SINI on 06.04.1990 and after completion of two years training at ZTS/SNY, the applicant joined at BSP on 20.05.1992 and worked as AYM/Bhalai. It is submitted that applicant joined at East Coast Railway vide order dated 03.07.1997 and then was promoted to the pay scale of Rs. 5500- 9000/- vide order dated 22.03.2000. It is submitted that the applicant was again promoted to the post TI Grade I vide order dated 22.12.2003 and then was granted 2nd MACP w.e.f.
4 OA 318 of 2021 24.03.2012 vide order dated 07.05.2014. It is submitted that Railway Board vide RBE No. 26 of 2020 dated 25.02.2020 decided that benefit of MACP shall be admissible to the Station Masters w.e.f. 16.02.2018 ignoring their promotion from ASM to SM. It is submitted that applicant vide representation dated 25.06.2020 requested for grant of 3rd MACP which was rejected by Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 23.07.2020. It is submitted that the applicant again raised grievance for 3rd MACP treating his initial appointment as 06.04.1990 but the said was rejected by the authorities vide order dated 29.04.2021 on the ground that his training period shall be excluded for the purpose of granting MACP. The applicant has relied on the decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 763/2015 (Ashok Kumar Barikvs UOI &ors), WP A No. 3080 of 2018 (Union of India vrsJitendra Singh) and decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 22186- 22188/2018. Hence the OA.
3. The respondents in their counter inter alia averred that as per RBE No. 100/2012 dated 12.09.2012 if the relevant RRs (recruitment rules) provide for filling up of vacancies in a grade by direct recruitment, induction of an employee to that grade through LDCE/GDCE may be treated as Direct Recruitment for 5 OA 318 of 2021 the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under MACPs and in such case past service rendered in a lower pay scale/grade pay shall not be counted for the purpose of MACP. It is submitted that therefore services of the applicant will be reckoned for MACP from his regular posting as Asst. Yard Master after completion of training i.e. 20.05.1992. It is submitted that as per RBE No. 101/2009 regular service is categorically defined in the para 9 hat regular service for the purpose of MACPs shall commence from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade on regular basis and service rendered on pre-appointment shall not be taken into reckoning. It is submitted that applicant was granted 2nd MACP taking 20 years from regularization as Asst. Yard Master and there is no ground open for the applicant for granting him financial upgradation under MACP scheme. It is submitted by respondents that the decision relied by learned counsel for the applicant in OA No. 763/2014 is not applicable to the present case. Accordingly they have prayed for dismissal of OA.
4. The applicant has filed rejoinder wherein it is inter alia averred that the entire period of training has been treated as continuous service and the applicant was granted DA and 6 OA 318 of 2021 increment for the said period, thereby treating the period of training as in service training.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records.
6. The sole ground on which the prayer of the applicant for grant of MACP has been rejected by the respondents in their letter dated 29.04.2021 is that his regular service for the purpose of MACP is to be counted from the date of Asst. Yard Master (Excluding the training period), therefore since he joined in his post on 20.05.1992 after completion of his training period, he is not entitled to grant of 3rd MACP.
7. Treating of training period as regular service for the purpose of granting ACP/MACP is no more a res integra. This Tribunal held the same view in OA No. 763 of 2014. Hon'ble Apex Court SLP (C) No. 8102/2018 has held:
"We find no ground to interfere with the impugned order (s) passed by the High Court on the ground that the petitioners were given the regular pay scale and the increments were also given to them right from day one. Even during the training period, increments were given to them. We have considered the policy pertaining to ACP. On perusal of the same, we find no ground to deny the benefit of training period, which was after appointment.
7 OA 318 of 2021 The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly dismissed."
8. It is clear from the records that the applicant has been granted increment during the training period and there is no break in service during the same period. It is also seen that the case of the applicant is squarely covered by decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 763/2014 and decision of Hon'ble Apex Court quoted above and we find no reason to differ from it. Therefore, the action of the respondents in not granting 3rd MACP to the applicant on 30.04.2020 i.e. 30 years of completion of service is found to be illegal and accordingly the impugned order dated 29.04.2021 is quashed. Resultantly, the respondent are directed to grant 3rd MACP to the applicant w.e.f. 30.04.2020 and pay him arrears and consequential benefits within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
9. The OA is allowed with above directions. No costs.
(PRAMOD KUMAR DAS) (SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J) (csk)