Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

application,

6. The respondents filed their reply. They contended that the applicants had entered service as a direct recruit Floor Assistants in fis not in dispute that the applicants were made permanent with effeet from og® March, . 1982, They were aceordin rely granted first LLL LLL LLL LLL ELLE LLL LLL, io OA No.odi/eos8 ACP in the next pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,506/-. They are entitled | to a regular promotion in the post of Floor Manager. The pay seale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- came to be revised fo PRB-IT Le. Rs.9,306-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/-. The applicants were granted ad hoe promotion as Floor Manager and they were also granted a"? MACP with effect from o1 September, 2008. The respondents contended that the pay scale of Floor Manager has been enhanced to Rs.6,500-10,500/- in Prasar Bharti by the order dated 25% February, 1999. Before that the pay scale was Rs.§,000-8,000/-. Consequently, the applicants would be entitled to i ACP with effect fram oot Ausust, 1909 only in Rs.5,000- 8,000/~ which was the next promotional avenue of the Floor Manager having the said pay scale. Tt was later on revealed that the revised pay seule of Rs.6,500-10,500/- which was granted to the Fleor Manager was without the concurrence of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure. Therefore, Prasar Bharti issued OM dated icf arch, 2001 to the effect that grant of pay seale of Rs.6,500- 10,500/- as against the Reernitment Rules granting pay seale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- In the post of Floor Manacer was to be treated 2 * BS se es ot ny tanh py ES as 8 ACP, Therefore, the pay scale for the post of F a & loor Manager OA. Ne.esi/eowd ought to be Rs.5,000-8,o00/-. The Government of India, s| therefore, decided to treat the upgradation of the pay scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- of Floor Manager to Rs.6,500-10 0,500/-. Earller after the pay seale of Rs. 4,000-6,00G/- the next pay seale avaliable was Rs. 4,500-7,000/- whereafter the government servant is promoted to the scale of Rs. 5,000-8,00G/- and finally to 6,900-10,500/-, The movement from 4,000-6000/- to 6,500- 10,500/- directly entailed movement between three seales of pay. It was thereafter decided to treat upgradation of Floor | Manager from §,000-8,000/- to 6,500-10,500/- as one upgradation under ACP/MACP scheme. Therefore, first ACP of 6,500- 10,500/- to be treated as advance for Floor Manager. Therefore, the third and last upgradation that could have been given to the applicant was obviously in the grade pay Rs. aBoo/-. Therefore, the movement of the applicant hy way of third MACP te erade pay of Rs. s400/-

"There is no doubt that the object of the ACP Office Memorandum dated oot August, 1999 was to relleve stagnation of its officers and employees who failed to secure any promotion at all within the prescribed period, Le, 12 years and 24 years. The Scheme, therefore, constituted a promise and an entitlement that post hased promotion would be governed and at least two financial upgradations would be assured to those unsuccessful in gettin even tae promotion, and one financial upgradation would be assured to someone who secures only one promotional benelit. As moticed earlier, the benefit was cgependent upon the possession of basic eligibility conditions applicable for the promotional post 'but was not dependent upon existence of vacancy. Whilst this is the reality underlying the ACP Memorandum of o9.8.10990, what is to be noticed is that the same Memorandum expressly states that in situ promotions and fast track promotions availed through Limited Departmental competitive Examination would be counted as promotions disentitling the claimant to the benefit. aragraph 45.1). However, paragraph 7 of the ACP Memorandum Specifically states that upgradation under the scheme "shall be given to the next higher grade in accordance with the existing hierarchy in a cadre/eategory of post without creating new post for the purpose". The CAT's reasoning in the main order is that In the existing hierarchy, the next promotional avenue was to th cadre of Floor Manager. The scales for that post stood upgraded from Rs.s500-906/- to Rs. 5500-10,500/- by the wogradation order of 25.2.1999. The logic used to reject Praser nS claim, therefore, was conypelling and inevitable, namely, that even in the Gud. Notifsowr existing hierarchy, the grade of Floor Managers carried the pay scale of Rs.6500- 1G,500 as on G.B.tog9g when the ACP Memorandum itself was issued. This court finds no reason to interfere with tis BR finding.
"12.This court is of the opinion that Prasar Bhart's argur nents are unacceptable. Whatever be the e predilections of Prasar Bharti as of 2001, the fact remains that exercise of option for the entire class of Central Government employees sent on deputation became a relevant factor at least by virtue of the amendment brought into force wiet 8.9.201e. Such Central Governttient employees Ww ould be deemed to be deputationists j in the entire tenure of thelr service life. This is exp pressly spelt in Section 1); Section 11fA) goes to the extent of saying that the exis! Ling terms, seales, ete, w ould be continued by Prasar Bharti which would then have the option of framing any new rules ete. Such being the position, paragraph 2 () of the upgradation order merely reflects historical facts, and no more. The optles exervised by the class of Government employees who continue with that status irrelevant. They and eyen off WHE opted to be the Prasar Bhari' sen mp! VERS cantinued to he deputationists. Therefore, the arguments bas od wen wie interpretation ¢ of the Act are So far as paragraph 4 af a3 order goes, whilst no Y doubt. fe spells ont hehe O.A. No.oda/ sors that the benefit (of pgradation) would be confined to incumbents in the post, and correspondingly direct recruits (of Prasar Bharti) would not be entitled to the upgraded scales, the last part of this condition (paragraph 4) states that the promotees would be entitled to the upgraded scales. Now, if this was the correct position, there can be no manner of doubt that employees working as Floor Assistants including C Central Government Employees-w rere entitled to be considered for promotion as Floor Manager. Tf that benefit were to be given in the normal course, the grade or pay scales of Floor Manager would Inevitably be Rs. 6500- 10,500/-. In that eventuality, whether the promotee was from the class of Central Government er nployees ora Prasar Bharti aptee would also be irrelevant, The ACP scheme was framed to alleviate the hardship ta those who were unable to secure such promotions. Therefore, the financial upsradation had to be to such pay scales as were within the existing hierarchy. Consequently, even the existing hierarchy, the ey seale for Floor Managers was Rs.6900-10,500/; the ACP could have been te no other grade."

20. Another question is whether the applicants are entitled to the beneft of third financial upgradation.

21. Under the ACP/MACP Scheme, benefit of af financial upgradation can be granted to an enyoloyee only if during so years of service no promotion has been granted. However, if one promotion has been granted, then only two benefits can be extended and if promotion has been granted twice during 30 cs.

years of service, then ure one benefit of financial upgradation oe go ean be granted. Since the ape Heants have also been granted benefit of ACP Land ACP Tl and also have been promoted as Floor Managers vide order dated 18.12.2012, they can be granted only two financial upgradations under ACP/MACP Schemes.