Appointment To New Post After Abolition Of Old One, Not 'Promotion' For MACP Benefits: Meghalaya High Court

A Division Bench of the Meghalaya High Court comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh held that when an employee is shifted to a newly created post (Hindi Officer/Assistant Director) due to abolition of the earlier post (Hindi Instructor) and merger of pay scales of both posts, such appointment is not a promotion and cannot be counted as financial upgradations under the MACP Scheme. Background Facts The deceased employee joined the North Eastern Police Academy (NEPA) as a Hindi Instructor on 12.11.1984. On 26.05.1998, the Ministry of Home Affairs created a new post of Hindi Officer. It led to the abolition of the existing post of Hindi Instructor. The employee was temporarily promoted and appointed as Hindi Officer with effect from 01.06.1998 in a higher pay scale after the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee. The Assured Career Progression Scheme came into being on 09.08.1999. The employee had completed 12 years of service and was promoted in 1998, therefore, he was not granted 1st ACP. Later, the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme replaced the ACP Scheme, providing financial upgradations on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service, if an employee is stagnated in the same post. The employee was promoted to the post of Hindi Officer in 1998 in a higher pay scale, therefore, he was entitled for his second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme. He was granted 2nd MACP. Subsequently, the post of Hindi Officer was re-designated as Assistant Director with higher grade pay, making the earlier MACP order void. The employee superannuated on 01.09.2017. Later he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking upgradations, which were allowed. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's order, the Union of India filed the writ petition before the High Court of Meghalaya. It was argued by the Union of India that the deceased employee joined service as Hindi Instructor in the year 1984 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Hindi Officer/Assistant Director w.e.f. 1998. Therefore if the date of reckoning for grant of financial upgradation under the ACP/MACP Scheme was to be counted from 1984 (the day he joined service), then he would no longer qualify to the 1st ACP, having completed 12 years of service in 1996, but would still be eligible to be considered for the 2nd and 3rd upgradation under the MACP Scheme which was done. It was further submitted that under the MACP Scheme, he was granted 2nd financial upgradation upon completing 10 years of service as Hindi Officer. The Union contended that he was not eligible for 3rd MACP since he had superannuated, but he was granted the same. On the other hand, it was argued by the employee that under the MACP Scheme, promotion earned under the ACP Scheme or upgradations due to merger of pay scales shall be ignored for the purpose of MACP. It was further submitted that the 6th CPC merged the pay scales of Hindi Instructor and Hindi Officer into the same grade pay of ₹ 4200/-, therefore, appointment of the employee as Hindi Officer could not be treated as a promotion. It was submitted that the deceased employee was drawing grade pay of ₹ 5400/- and therefore, he was entitled to 1st, 2nd and 3rd financial upgradations under the MACP Scheme. Findings and Observations of the Court It was noted by the Court that upon creation of the post of Hindi Officer, the earlier post of Hindi Instructor stood abolished with effect from the same date. There was nothing on record to suggest that the post of Hindi Instructor was a feeder cadre for the post of Hindi Officer. Therefore, it was observed that the deceased employee was not given a promotion as Hindi Officer. It was further observed that the MACP Scheme confirms that since there was a merger of pay scales as per the 6th CPC, therefore, the pay scale of Hindi Instructor and Hindi Officer became the same at the relevant point of time. Hence, the post of Hindi Officer was not a promotional post. It was held by the Division Bench that the employee was entitled to 1st financial upgradation in the grade pay of ₹ 6600/- w.e.f. 01.09.2008, 2nd upgradation in the grade pay of ₹ 7600/- w.e.f. 01.09.2008 and finally to the 3rd upgradation in the grade pay of ₹ 8700 w.e.f. 14.11.2014 on accomplishment of 30 years of regular service. Hence, the direction of the Tribunal to grant the employee the 1st, 2nd and 3rd financial upgradations was upheld by the Division Bench. Accordingly, the petition filed by the Union of India was disposed of by the Division Bench. Case Name : Union of India & Ors. Vs. Smti. Veena Dhoundiyal Case No. : WP (C) No. 139 of 2024 Counsel for the Petitioners : N. Mozika, DSGI with K. Gurung, Adv. Counsel for the Respondent : M. Chanda, Adv. with Kumar Abhinandan, AdvClick Here To Read/Download Order

Appointment To New Post After Abolition Of Old One, Not 'Promotion' For MACP Benefits: Meghalaya High Court

Namdev Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Namdev Singh

Appointment To New Post After Abolition Of Old One, Not 'Promotion' For MACP Benefits: Meghalaya High Court

Namdev Singh

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Namdev Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers