Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. BANUMATHI, A.S. BOPANNA, HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.
Union of India and Others – Appellants
Versus
M.V. Mohanan Nair — Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2016 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 21803 of 2014) with Civil Appeal No. 2017 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 22181 of 2014); Civil Appeal No. 2018 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 23335 of 2014); Civil Appeal No. 2019 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 23333 of 2014); Civil Appeal No. 2020 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 18227 of 2015); Civil Appeal No. 2021 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 31125 of 2016); Civil Appeal No. 2022 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 33706 of 2016); Civil Appeal No(S). 2044-2045 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP(C)No(s). 5917-5918 of 2017 @ SLP(C) Diary No. 6042 of 2017)
Decided on : 05-03-2020
(a) Service law - Assured Career Progression and Modified Assured Career Progression - Distinction - First Schedule, Part-A of Section 1, Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 - Under ACP Scheme employees, on completion of 12 years of service, would be entitled to the financial upgradation in the next promotional hierarchy - Under MACP Scheme, the Government servant, on completion of 10 years of service entitled to grant of financial upgradation, in immediate next higher Grade Pay and not the grade pay on promotional hierarchy - ACP Scheme withdrawn and superseded by MACP Scheme -
Respondents claiming the best of benefits from both ACP and MACP Schemes. (Para 16, 17)
(b) Service law - MACP scheme - Contention that benefit of MACP Scheme is referable to the promotional post - Rejected being de hors the MACP Scheme. (Para 27)
(c) Administrative law - Government accepting recommendation of Pay Commission and also implemented them - Any interference by the court would have a serious impact on the public exchequer. (Para 29, 51)
(d) Administration of justice - Judicial review - Policies framed accepting recommendations of expert bodies like the Pay Commission are not ordinarily subject to judicial review - Instantly interference with supersession of ACP scheme by MACP scheme - Such a policy matter cannot be interfered with. (Para 31, 33, 35, 51)
(e) Administration of justice - Judicial review - MACP - Respondents claiming financial upgradation in the grade pay of promotional hierarchy without challenging validity of MACP scheme - Not tenable. (Para 35)
(f) Constitution of India - Article 141 - Binding precedent - Dismissal of SLP on ground of unexplained delay in filing it and not on merits - Not a binding precedent - Raj Pal's case not a binding precedent. (Para 44, 45)
Facts of the case:
In these batch matters, we are concerned with the question whether MACP Scheme entitles financial upgradation to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional hierarchy.
Finding of the Court:
No interference with MACP scheme is warranted.
Result: All impugned orders in these batch of appeals set aside and appeals preferred by Union of India allowed. Appeal arising out of SLP(C)No.33706 of 2016 disposed of.
Key Points: - The MACP Scheme provides financial upgradation in the immediate next higher grade pay, not in the next promotional hierarchy (contrasting ACP). (!) (!) (!) - The ACP Scheme is distinct, requiring stricter promotional norms and functioning as a personal upgradation not constituting true promotion; MACP superseded ACP to address inter-departmental disparities. (!) (!) (!) - Courts generally defer to government policy and expert Pay Commission recommendations; interference is not ordinarily warranted, and Raj Pal’s case is not a binding precedent. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT :
R. Banumathi, J.
Leave granted.
2. The instant batch of appeals have been filed assailing the orders of various High Courts dismissing petitions filed by the appellants, thereby upholding decisions rendered by different Benches of Central Administrative Tribunal granting financial upgradation of grade pay in the next promotional hierarchy by placing reliance upon Union of India and others v. Raj Pal and another CWP No. 19387 of 2011 dated 19.10.2011. In these batch matters, we are concerned with the question whether MACP Scheme entitles financial upgradation to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional hierarchy.
3. In all these appeals, almost all the High Courts have followed the Raj Pal and Ved Prakash's case and granted relief as prayed for by the respondents. Being aggrieved, the appellant-UOI has filed these appeals.
4. The main questions falling for consideration in these appeals are:-
(i) Whether MACP scheme entitles financial upgradation of pay to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional post as envisaged under the ACP scheme? Whether MACP Scheme envisages grant of financial upgradation in Grade Pay Hierarchy and not in promotional hierarchy?
(ii) As contended by the respondents, whether MACP scheme is disadvantageous to the employees in comparison to ACP scheme as long as the financial upgradation is granted in hierarchy of grade pay under MACP scheme?
(iii) Whether respondents are entitled to stepping up of their grade pay to be at par with grade pay of their juniors who were getting the higher grade pay on account of implementation of MACP Scheme?
Appeals relating to Issue No.III were ordered to be de-tagged and listed separately.
5. At the outset, it is to be pointed out that almost all the Tribunals/High Courts have only relied upon Raj Pal's case for grant of financial upgradation on promotional hierarchy and rejected the stand of the appellant-UOI that under MACP scheme, the employees are entitled to financial upgradation of the next grade pay only. Since the matter was considered on merits and since the issue involves impact on the public exchequer and also interest of the staff of various establishments, we requested learned Senior counsel, Mr. Jaideep Gupta to assist the Court as amicus curiae which the learned Senior counsel has readily consented. Mr. Kunal Chatterji, learned counsel has agreed to assist the learned Senior co unse l -amicus.
Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme:-
6. The Government of India with a view to "deal with the problem of genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the employees due to lack of adequate promotional avenues", introduced the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999 vide its Office Memorandum dated 09.08.1999. To mitigate the hardship in cases of acute stagnation in a cadre or in an isolated post, it has been decided to grant two financial upgradations under the ACP Scheme to Group 'B', 'C and 'D' employees on completion of 12 and 24 years of regular service. As per ACP Scheme, isolated post in Group 'A, 'B', 'C and 'D' cadres which have no promotional avenues also qualify for similar benefits. The financial upgradations under the ACP Scheme is placement in the higher Pay Scale and financial benefits in the higher Pay Scale without regular promotion. Under the financial upgradation, grant of financial benefits under the ACP Scheme to the government servants concerned is on personal basis. Such financial upgradation neither amounts to regular promotion nor require creation of new post. Some of the salient features of the ACP Scheme are as follows:-
•The ACP Scheme envisages merely placement in the higher pay-scale/grant of financial benefits (through financial upgradation) only to the Government servant concerned on personal basis and shall, therefore, neither amount to functional/regular promotion nor
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
