Employee Can't Claim ACP Benefits On The Ground That It Is More Beneficial Than MACP Scheme : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has set aside a judgment of the Delhi High Court which directed for applying the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme in the Delhi Development Authority with effect from January 1, 2006.The bench of Justices UU Lalit, SR Bhat and Bela M Trivedi was considering SLP assailing Delhi High Court's order of directing to extend the MACP benefits to the Delhi Development Authority employees from 1st January, 2006.The Supreme Court held that the employees cannot claim a vested right for Assured Career Progression(ACP) scheme. The employees claimed for a second upgradation under the previous ACP scheme on the ground that it was more beneficial than the MACP scheme. The Court turned down this plea.The Court observed hat a set of employees, who might have benefitted from the then prevailing regime or policy, cannot in the absence of strong and unequivocal indications in the later policy insist that they have a right to be given the benefits under the superseded policy. While allowing the appeal in The Vice Chairman Delhi Development Authority V. Narender Kumar & Ors., the bench said, "That, some employees could have benefitted more under the ACP benefits,if the MACP scheme had not been introduced from an earlier date, is no ground to hold so and compel an executive agency to grant the claimed benefits".The Court observed that second ACP upgradation was not an automatic right as it was dependent on various external factors and that employee cannot claim a vested right for it.Factual BackgroundThe Central Government, in supersession of the ACP Scheme, introduced the MACP scheme, by an office memorandum in May, 2019. The MACP was made applicable from an earlier date, i.e. 1st September, 2008, through a specific condition in that scheme The respondent employees were appointed as regular work charged Malis by DDA from various dates beginning from January 3, 1985. On completion of 12 years of regular service, they were granted first financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression(ACP) Scheme with effect from January 3, 1997. They became eligible for second financial upgradation with effect from January 3, 2009 upon completion of 24 years of service which was not granted to them by DDA. Since DDA introduced MACP scheme with effect from September 1, 2008 by an order dated October 6, 2009, the employees approached Central Administrative Tribunal ("CAT") contending that they should have been granted the benefit of second ACP as the claim of second ACP benefit had accrued to them earlier.There is no dispute that under the MACP Scheme, the employees were granted the second MACP benefits- later. The employees' grievance was that the DDA introduced the MACP scheme with effect from (01/09/2008) by an order dated 06.10.2009 and according to them, as their eligibility (indeed, as claimed, their entitlement) to claim the second ACP benefit had accrued to them earlier, they should have been granted the benefit of second ACP. Consequently, they approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) by filing original applications.Before CAT, the employee- respondents contended that the ACP Scheme was more beneficial to them, in comparison with benefits under the MACP Scheme. CAT while opining that the employees were entitled to the claim, allowed the applications and directed DDA to consider their cases for granting of the financial up-gradations under the ACP Scheme till 19.05.2009. The Tribunal also directed DDA to grant appropriate pay scales accordingly in case they being qualified and eligible with all consequential benefits. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's order, DDA approached Delhi High Court. DDA before the High Court contended that with effect from 1st September, 2008, the MACP Scheme had become operational and that the applicants- employees were no longer entitled to receive the benefits under the (erstwhile) ACP scheme. It was also contended that the ACP scheme was valid only until 31st August, 2008 and by that date the employees had not completed 24 years of service. It was further submitted that since the MACP scheme was introduced by the Office Memorandum ("OM") dated 19th May, 2019, superseding the earlier ACP scheme, the question of granting any benefit under the ACP scheme after 31st August, 2008 did not arise.The High Court relied on the decision Union of India v. Balbir Singh Turn (2018) 11 SCC 99 where it was held that Armed Forces Personnel, had to be given the benefit of the MACP from the date of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (January 1, 2006) and not from 1st September 2008. Based on this logic, the High Court directed that the MACP benefits should be extended to the employees with effect from January 1, 2006. Submission Of Parties Appearing for DDA, Senior Advocate Kailash Vasudev submitted that MACP scheme came into effect on 01.09.2008 and this should be the criteria with respect to which...

Employee Can't Claim ACP Benefits On The Ground That It Is More Beneficial Than MACP Scheme : Supreme Court

Shruti Kakkar

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Shruti Kakkar

Employee Can't Claim ACP Benefits On The Ground That It Is More Beneficial Than MACP Scheme : Supreme Court

Shruti Kakkar

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Shruti Kakkar

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers