The court emphasized that the denial of financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme should not be based on the non-completion of a pre-promotional cadre course if the fault lies with the respondents for not detailing the petitioner for the course.

Reva Khetrapal, J.

CM No.8313/2014

Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

WP(C) No.4138/2014

1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the signals dated 28.05.2013 and 03.07.2013 whereunder the respondents have denied benefits to the Petitioner under the ACP Scheme to the extent that the Petitioner has been held eligible for the 2nd financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme from the completion of the promotional course (SUOCC) and not from completion of 24 years of regular service. The Petitioner has further prayed for directions to the respondents to grant 2nd financial upgradation benefits to the Petitioner under the ACP Scheme as has been approved vide order dated 01.02.2013 after completion of 24 years of regular service.

2. The relevant facts are that as per the ACP Scheme, in order to be eligible for grant of 2nd financial upgradation, an employee is required to have completed 24 years regular service from the date of his appointment to a post without any promotion in the last 12 years and he should have successfully undertaken the pre-promotional cadre course (SUOCC). It is an admitted fact that the petitioner had completed his 24 years of regular service without there being any promotion in the last 12 years. However, the Petitioner was not granted his financial upgradation as he had not undergone the promotional course required for promotion to the next rank. It is also relevant to note that the non-completion of the said pre-promotional cadre course was not due to the fact that the petitioner had not undertaken the said course, but for the reason that the respondents for their own fault did not detail the petitioner to undergo the said pre-promotional courses.

3. The respondents, acknowledging the above fault of theirs, issued clarification order dated 06.03.2012 after consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs. The said clarification regarding financial benefits under ACP/MACP Scheme issued by the office of Directorate General, CRPF reads as under:

“Sub: Grant of Financial Benefits under ACP/MACP Scheme-Clarification.

A case was referred to the MHA seeking clarification in connection with grant of financial up-gradation under MACP scheme to the Constables and fixation of pay thereupon. The issue was examined in MHA, DoPT and Department of Expenditure (MoF). After due examination the Ministries have clarified the position as under:

1. The case of Cts who have qualified promotional course (i.e. SCC) and allowed 1st ACP benefit from the next date of termination of SCC qualified by them may be reviewed and they may now be granted financial up-gradation under ACP and MACP schemes as under:

Sl. No. Categories of CTs Modalities for Grant of Financial up-gradation benefits under ACP/MACP Schemes

1)

CTs who qualified

promotional course

within maximum

permissible three

chances.

Since these CTs were detailed on promotional course after completion of more than 12 years of service, they may be allowed 1st financial up-gradation under ACP Scheme (of August 1999) from the date of completion of 12 years of service subject to fulfillment of other eligibility conditions, as there is no fault on their part for late detailment on promotional course. Financial up-gradation under MACP will be admissible to such CTs wherever they complete 20/30 years of continuous regular service or spent 10 years continuously in the same Grade pay whichever is earlier”.

4. Thereafter, the respondents passed an order dated 1.2.2013 wherein the 2nd financial up-gradation under the ACP Scheme was granted to petitioner.

5. Subsequently, however, the Respondents, instead of releasing the financial benefits to the Petitioner pursuant to the issuance of the above order, issued the impugned Signals dated 28th May, 2013 and 3rd July, 2013, which are also in direct contradiction to the clarification order dated 6th March, 2012 issued by the Directorate General office and the Ministry of Home Affai