Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(iv) That the costs of this application may be awarded."

2(a). The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, is that the applicant was initially appointed as Postman on 13.10.1989 vide Memo dated 16.10.1989 and he was further appointed as Postal Assistant on 25.03.1995 vide Memo dated 31.03.1995. Thereafter, on qualifying the examination of Post Offices / Railway Mail Services Accountants in the year 2001, he was posted as Accountant in various offices of Bharatpur Postal Division and at present, he is working as Accountant in Bharatpur Head Post Office. The applicant states that Government of India promulgated Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) for the Central Government Civilian Employees for placement in higher scale after completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service and respondent-department also adopted the same vide OM dated 18.09.2009 and taking into consideration the said Scheme, the respondent No. 3 vide Memo dated 18.03.2010 (Annexure A/2) placed certain official in next grade pay of Rs. 2800 w.e.f. 01.09.2008 including the applicant taking into consideration his 10 years service in Postal Assistant cadre. In fact, applicant was allowed first financial up- gradation in the Pay Band Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs. 2800. The applicant further states that respondent no. 3 had rightly allowed first financial up- gradation vide Memo dated 18.03.2010 (Annexure A/2) to him taking into consideration his 10 years service in the cadre of Postal Assistant but against the procedure, respondents have reviewed the cases and in review taking into consideration his service rendered from Postman cadre, modified the benefits of first up-gradation to second up-gradation vide Memo dated 23.08.2011 (Annexure A/1). By this action, the applicant has been deprived from second financial up- gradation in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200 for which he was due in the year 2015 after completion of 20 years service in the cadre of Postal Assistant. 2(b). The applicant also states that he joined respondent-department as Postman in the year 1989 and thereafter he was appointed as Postal Assistant on 25.03.1995 against direct recruitment vacancies and the same is entry into the grade, but respondents treated as one promotion from Postman to Postal Assistant and denied the benefits of first up-gradation under MACP Scheme. The applicant also states that similar controversies are pending before various Benches of this Tribunal and some of the Benches hold that entry grade is Postal Assistant cadre. So benefits of MACP should be allowed by counting service from the cadre of Postal Assistant and in similar circumstances, Principal Bench of this Tribunal has allowed the Original Applications against withdrawing the benefits and the same has been upheld by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide its order dated 05.08.2014, (Annexure A/6), in W.P. (C) No. 4131/2014, Union of India & Ors. vs. Shakeel Ahmad Burney. The applicant has filed representation on 02.07.2014 for treating benefits of second MACP as first MACP and further for consideration to second MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200 due in the year 2015, but respondents have nowhere considered the same and convened screening committee for the period from 01.10.2014 to 31.03.2015 and allowed the benefits of MACP Scheme to other officials vide Memo dated 17.07.2014 (Annexure A/8) whereas name of the applicant has nowhere been considered despite the fact that he is going to complete 20 years of service in the cadre of Postal Assistant on 25.03.2015.

2(c). The applicant further states that respondent- department has introduced One Time Bound Promotion Scheme in the year 1983 for placement in higher scale after 16 years of service and thereafter further scheme in the year 1991 for placement in further higher scale after completion of 26 years of service and as per these schemes, service is counted from the clerical grade and not from the lower cadre, whereas respondents, without any base, are treating the appointment to the post of Clerk from lower staff as promotion, whereas as per MACP Scheme, 10 20 and 30 years of service is to be counted from entry into the grade and applicant had rightly been allowed first financial up-gradation w.e.f. 01.09.2008 vide Annexure A/2 and the same cannot be modified as second financial up-gradation. The applicant also states that he was appointed as Postal Assistant which is entry into the grade and from Postman cadre to Postal Assistant cadre, promotion cannot be counted and, in earlier schemes, counting of services are also from Postal Assistant cadre. Besides, there is no channel of promotion from Postman cadre to Postal Assistant cadre and lower staff always became Postal Assistant after passing departmental examination meant for the same against direct recruitment vacancies. Thus, counting as promotion from Postman to Postal Assistant is against facts and also against recruitment rules. Beside this, those officials who were appointed as Postal Assistant with the applicant directly have been allowed benefits of first MACP and further second MACP in the Grade Pay Rs. 4200 and so many juniors have been allowed Grade Pay Rs. 4200 as per seniority list in the cadre of Postal Assistant. Therefore, the applicant has filed the present O.A. for redressal of his grievance. 3(a). After issue of notices, respondents have filed their reply stating that the applicant was initially approved for outsider Postman cadre vide letter dated 28.08.1989 and he was posted as Postman on purely temporary capacity w.e.f. 13.10.1989 (F/N). The applicant, thereafter, was declared successful candidate in the examination for promotion from Lower Grade Officials (L.G.O., in short) to the cadre of Postal Assistant and was selected for appointment as Postal Assistant vide Memo dated 10.11.1994 and allotted to the office of Chief Postmaster, New Delhi and he was posted as officiating Postal Assistant w.e.f. 25.03.1995 vide Memo dated 31.03.1995. Thereafter, he has been transferred from Delhi Circle to Rajasthan Circle and was posted as Postal Assistant, Bharatpur HO and further qualified in PO/RMS Accountant in the year 2001 and presently posted as Accountant, Bharatpur HO. The respondent-department was not operating Assured Career Progression Scheme earlier, but had a parallel Scheme for granting financial up- gradation in the nature of the Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) on completion of 16 years of continuous service in a post and grade of pay without any promotion and after another Scheme of Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) was introduced by the department w.e.f. 01.10.1991 for those who had completed 26 years of service without any promotion or with only one promotion, to be granted the second financial up-gradation. After 6th Central Pay Commission, the Department of Posts vide OM dated18.09.2009, withdrew the earlier Schemes w.e.f. 01.09.2008 and introduced the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) for its employees for grant of financial up-gradations in the case of stagnation without promotion at intervals of 10, 20 and 30 years of service.

9. The claim of the applicant is that he was initially appointed as Postman on 13.10.1989. Thereafter, upon qualifying the departmental examination against direct recruitment quota, he was appointed as Postal Assistant on 25.03.1995, which is the entry into the grade of Postal Assistant cadre. He also qualified the examination of Post Offices/Railway Mail Services Accountant in the year 2001 and was posted as Accountant. There is no channel of promotion from Postman cadre to Postal Assistant cadre and a Postman becomes a Postal Assistant only after passing departmental examination against direct recruitment quota, thus, counting promotion from Postman to Postal Assistant cannot be accepted as it is against the recruitment rules.

"19. In a similar manner, while being Postmen, the three applicants in these three OAs faced the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE, in short) and qualified to become Postal Assistants. Their joining as Postal Assistants was not in the nature of promotion in their earlier existing service or cadre, but was a career advancement through a process of selection. Therefore, for the purpose of grant of TBOP/BCR financial upgradations earlier, and MACP financial upgradation now, the only dates which are relevant to be taken into account for the purpose of counting the periods of their stagnation is the period spent by the applicants as Postal Assistants. In that sense, the clarification issued by the Pay Commission Cell of the Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT on 25.04.2011 through file No. 4- 7/MACPS/2009/-PCC, as cited in para 8 above, is correct. The only problem with that clarification is that it stopped at the point of clarifying that when the GDS first joined in a Group-D post, and was later declared as successful in the Postman examination, the regular service for the purpose of MACP would be deemed to commence from the date of his joining as a Postman in the main cadre on direct recruit basis. But it is obvious that the corollary would follow, and when the Postman appears at the LDCE, and gets selected to a new Cadre as a Postal Assistant, then it is start of a new innings for him, and for the purpose of counting his stagnation, if any, the date of his joining as Postal Assistant alone would be relevant, and his previous career advancements cannot be called to be promotions within the definition of the word 'promotion', as is required for the grant of TBOP/BCR benefit consideration, and for consideration for eligibility for financial upgradation on account of stagnation under the MACP Scheme.