Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2020 Supreme(SC) 240

R.BANUMATHI, A.S.BOPANNA, HRISHIKESH ROY
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
M. V. Mohanan Nair – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Jaideep Gupta, Kunal Chatterji, Pravar Veer Mishra, Madhvi Divan, Kailash Vasdev, Priyanka Das, Raj Bahadur Yadav, Akshay Amritanshu, Anish Kr. Gupta, Pranay Ranjan, S.K. Gupta, Sumit Upadhyay, Rekha Pandey, Arvind Kumar Sharma, S.S. Ray, Vijay Prakash, B.V. Balram Das, Alka Agarwal, Baldev Atrey, B. Krishna Prasad, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Sahil Monga, Anil Katiyar, Priya Mishra, Arun Kumar Yadav, Surender Kumar Gupta, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Shubham Saurav, A.N.S. Nadkarni, ASG Mrs.Anil Katiyar, Rekha Pandey, Vimla Sinha, B.K. Prasad, Vijay Prakash, Rajeev Sharma, Sahil Bhalaik, Tushar Giri, Pradeep Kr. Mittal, Shivetima D., Simanta Kr., Saurabh Kr., Raj Kishor Choudhary, K. Rajeev, Advocates
For the Respondent:Vinay Kumar Garg, O. P. Bhadani, C. K. Sasi, Nayantara Roy, Abdulla N., Somya Gupta, P.A. Kulkarni, Punam Kumari, Yatindra Sharma, Prashant Kumar, G. Umapathy, Vaishnavi, Rakesh K. Sharma, G. Tushar Rao, Mayank Sharma, Kumar Dushyant Singh, Pavitra, Rakesh K. Sharma, D.K. Thakur, Devendra Jha, Shivaraju H.B., Rituparn Uniyal, Abhishek Kumar, For Debasis Misra, Mrs.Prabha Swami, Nikhil Swami, Divya Swami, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Mrs.Anil Katiyar, B. Krishna Prasad, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Naveen R. Nath, Rahul Jain, A. N. Arora, Sumita Hazarika, Ipsita Behura, Sunil Kumar Jain, M. B. Ramasubba Raju, E.P. Gopinathan, Megha, Balaji Srinivasan, R.S. Rajiv, K. Rajeev, Mohan Kumar, Manoj V. George, Shilpa Liza George, K.M. Vignesh Ram, Bhavika, Zulfiker Ali P.S., Advocates

Judgement Key Points

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requiring stricter promotional norms and functioning as a personal upgradation not constituting true promotion; MACP superseded ACP to address inter-departmental disparities.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. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

What is the scope of MACP scheme: whether it entitles financial upgradation to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional post?

What is the relationship and difference between ACP and MACP schemes, and can benefits under MACP be availed in addition to or in place of ACP?

What is the appropriate standard for judicial review of government pay policies and whether interference with Pay Commission recommendations is warranted?

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?

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2020 Supreme(SC) 240

R.BANUMATHI, A.S.BOPANNA, HRISHIKESH ROYUnion of India – AppellantVersusM. V. Mohanan Nair – Respondent

What is the scope of MACP scheme: whether it entitles financial upgradation to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional post?

What is the relationship and difference between ACP and MACP schemes, and can benefits under MACP be availed in addition to or in place of ACP?

What is the appropriate standard for judicial review of government pay policies and whether interference with Pay Commission recommendations is warranted?

Cases Referred (6)

R.BANUMATHI, A.S.BOPANNA, HRISHIKESH ROY
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
M. V. Mohanan Nair – Respondent