Jharkhand High Court
Rama Shankar Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand on 6 August, 2024
Author: Ambuj Nath
Bench: Ambuj Nath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 6446 of 2019
...........
Rama Shankar Prasad, son of late Mauji Lal, resident of Jail Campus Chaha, P.O.- Jamira (Ramgarh), P.S.- Rajrappa, District- Ramgarh.
... Petitioner
- Versus -
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Inspector General, Prison having office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi
3. Additional Inspector General, Prison having office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
... Respondents
------
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Utkarsh Krishna, Advocate : Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Shahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to AAG-III .................
07/06.08.2024 Heard the parties.
The petitioner Rama Shankar Prasad has filed this writ application for direction(s) upon the respondents to give the benefit of 1 st ACP with effect from 13.12.2003 in the pay- scale of Rs. 5,500-9,000/- and benefit of 2nd MACP with effect from 13.12.2011 in the pay scale of Rs.9,300- 34,800/- and Grade pay of Rs. 4,600/-.
The case of the petitioner is that he was working as Assistant Jailor. He was appointed on 13.12.1991 and accordingly, his 1 st ACP was due from 13.12.2003 and thereafter, the 2nd MACP had become due on 13.12.2011.
Mr. Utkarsh Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that benefit of 1st ACP and 2nd MACP has been given to him from the date when he had passed his departmental examination and not from the date when it became due.
Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has passed departmental examination in the year 2009 and as such, 1 st ACP shall be granted to the petitioner from the date when he has passed the departmental examination.
-2-Reliance has been placed upon the decision of this Court passed in W.P.(S) No.5307 of 2022 alongwith W.P.(S) No.6172 of 2022, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 496 has held that:-
"22. These issues fell for consideration before Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Singh & Ors. (supra), wherein all the aspects of the matter in respect of grant of ACP/MACP and the object thereto has been considered, which is evident from bare reading of pargraphs-12 to 20 of the judgment, which are as follows:-
"12. It may be worth noting that the ACP scheme was enforced on the recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission in context with Group C and D employees and it provided monetary benefit to the employees on completion of 12 years and 24 years of regular service who were not able to get promotion. The scheme as such was anti-stagnation and envisages merely placement of the employees in the higher pay scale for the grant of financial upgradation only without grant of actual promotion. The benefit of the ACP as such is like granting non-functional in situ promotion.
13. At the cost of repetition, it must be borne in mind that the object of ACP is to avoid stagnation where no promotional avenues are available. The grant of ACP is not technically a grant of promotion but increase in the pay scale to the next higher grade retaining the employee on the post held by him. This is only to accord monetary benefit without disturbing any seniority or actually effectuating promotion to any higher post to avoid stagnation on a particular post or pay scale for a very long period.
14. The object and purpose of ACP/MACP Scheme has been reiterated by this Court in Union of India v. C.R. Madhava Murthy, (2022) 6 SCC 183, as one to relieve the frustration on account of stagnation and it does not involve actual grant of promotional post but merely monetary benefits in the form of next higher grade subject to fulfilment of qualifications and eligibility criteria.-3-
15. In sum and substance, both ACP and MACP Schemes are schemes devised with the object of ensuring that the employees who are unable to avail of adequate promotional opportunities, get some relief in the form of financial benefits. Accordingly, the schemes provide for regular financial upgradation on completion of 12-24 years and 10-20-30 years of service without promotion. They are incentive schemes for the employees who complete a particular period of service but without getting promotion for lack of promotional avenues. The effect of the schemes must be judged keeping in view the object and the purport of the scheme.
16. In Union of India v. G. Ranjanna reported in (2008)
14 SCC 721, the three-Judges Bench of this Court held that in situ promotions are made to remove stagnation of grade C and grade D employees by giving them certain monetary benefits.
17. It was further observed that fulfilment of educational qualifications prescribed under the recruitment rules for the purposes of promotion are not necessary for non-functional in situ promotion. In other words, educational qualification required for the purposes of promotion is not necessary for the grant of in situ promotion, i.e., only 12 for extending the monetary benefit where there are no promotional avenues and the employees are likely to be stagnated.
18. In the aforesaid case, the employees were working as malis (Gardeners) and had claimed promotion in the higher pay scale. The Central Administrative Tribunal seized of the original applications observed that the employees cannot claim the scale of the next higher post by way of in situ promotion. On the matter being taken to the High Court by way of a writ petition, the contention of the employees was accepted and it was observed that the object of in situ promotion on non-functional posts, is to ensure that the group C and D employees are not stagnated in the same cadre/pay scale and that they should be provided with certain monetary benefits. Therefore, the rejection of the claim for such nonfunctional in situ promotion on the ground that the employees do not possess the necessary minimum qualification of matriculation as per the rules is not justified and renders the order erroneous in law. The view so -4- taken by the Division Bench of the High Court was affirmed by this Court in the above referred Civil Appeals holding that the High Court has correctly analysed the object of the in situ promotion and fixation of pay scales to Group C and D employees to avoid stagnation.
19. In view of the aforesaid legal position coupled with the fact that the qualification of graduation prescribed is for the promotion to the post of Accounts Officer rather than for the grant of in situ promotion on the non-functional post or for extending the benefit of ACP which is purely and simply in the nature of grant of monetary benefit without actually effectuating any promotion to any higher post, we are of the opinion that the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court impugned in the appeals cannot be sustained. It is accordingly hereby set aside and that the judgment of the writ court dated 28.11.2017 is restored. The appellants are extended the benefit of ACP, as directed by the writ court.
20. We have not considered it necessary to deal with the two cases on the basis of which the Single Judge has allowed the writ petitions and granted the benefit of the ACP to the appellants, as we have independently of those two decisions have considered and held that the appellants are entitled to financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme on completion of requisite regular service ignoring the higher qualification prescribed for the next higher post as grant of such benefit is not actually a promotion but only financial upgradation and if the higher qualification is insisted it would frustrate the purpose of the entire scheme."
23. The Hon'ble Apex Court considering the earlier judgment rendered in the case of Union of India v. C.R. Madhava Murthy, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 183, clearly held that "the purpose of the ACP Scheme/MACP Scheme is to relieve the frustration on account of stagnation and the Scheme does not involve the actual grant of promotional post to the employees, but to merely monetary benefits in the form of next higher grade subject to fulfilment of qualifications and eligibility criteria."
24. Therefore, it is now settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that the requirement of regular promotion is not necessarily required to be fulfilled for the purpose of grant of ACP/MACP. In that case, the employee who -5- did not even have the qualification of graduation which the requirement of regular promotion, but the Hon'ble Apex Court held that those requirement of regular promotion are not required to be fulfilled for the purpose of grant of ACP/MACP, as the benefit of grant of ACP is like granting of non-functional in situ promotion."
The purpose of the ACP Scheme/MACP Scheme is to relieve the frustration of employees on account of stagnation. The Scheme does not involve the actual grant of promotional post to the employees, but merely to provide monetary benefits in the form of next higher grade subject to fulfillment of qualifications and eligibility criteria has been laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, passing of departmental examination is not a ground for extending financial upgradation to the employees as it is like granting of non-functional in situ promotion.
In light of the aforesaid decision, the grant of 1 st ACP to the petitioner had become due on 13.12.2003 and grant of 2nd MACP had become due on 13.12.2011.
Accordingly, the respondent No.2 Inspector General, Prison, Ranchi is directed to pass necessary order for granting of 1 st ACP and 2nd MACP to the petitioner from the date when it had become due.
The petitioner shall file a representation before the respondent No.2 Inspector General, Prison, Ranchi with a prayer to shift his financial upgradation of 1st ACP from 13.12.2003 and 2nd MACP from 13.12.2011. The respondent No.2 Inspector General, Prison, Ranchi is directed to pass necessary order on the representation of the petitioner within two months.
Accordingly, this writ application is allowed. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
(Ambuj Nath, J.) Jay/-