Entitlement to financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme is contingent upon compliance with mandatory requisites, including medical fitness and completion of promotional courses.

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Banerjee, J. - The petitioner is the widow of one Mr. Tarlok Masih1, who, after joining the Sashastra Seema Bal2 [Special Service Bureau as it then was] on 19.01.1976, completed more than 25 years of service, before taking voluntary retirement as Naik/GD w.e.f. from 01.05.2001. After the death of her husband on 19.08.2011, the petitioner came to know in the year 2017 about introduction of the Assured Career Progression3 Scheme of 09.08.1999 from a batchmate of her late husband. As per her, as her late husband had already completed more than 25 years of service before taking voluntary retirement and was eligible for the grant of financial upgradation under the said ACP scheme, she made a representation dated 09.11.2017 to the respondent No.4/Director General (DG), SSB for grant of the same. 1hereinafter referred to as 'late husband' 2Hereinafter referred to as 'SSB' 3hereinafter referred to as 'ACP' Receiving no response thereto, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking the following reliefs:

'a) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other writ or order or directions to the concerned respondent for granting the benefit of 1st financial up-gradation under ACP Scheme to the petitioner with effect from 09.08.1999 in the scale of Head Constable and other consequential benefits including arrears of payment being accrued thereto as per O.M. dated 09.08.1999 b) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other writ or order or directions to the concerned respondent for granting the benefit of 2nd financial up-gradation under ACP Scheme to the petitioner with effect from 18.01.2000 in the scale of Sub Inspector with other consequential benefits including arrears of payment being accrued thereto as per O.M. dated 09.8.1999.'

2. The first contention raised by petitioner is qua non-grant of 1st financial upgradation as per the ACP scheme to the post of Head Constable as the same is against Order No. 27012/1/97-PC Cell/PF.1 dated 10.10.1997 issued by The Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India whereby the earlier post of Naik stood merged in the new post of Head Constable in the Central Police Organisations and Order No.1/2/2001-EA.I-133 dated 15.01.2001 whereby the Special Service Bureau was transferred from the Cabinet Secretariat to The Ministry of Home Affairs with immediate effect. However, relying upon the admission of respondents in their counter affidavit wherein it is stated 'That according to the instructions issued by FHQ SSB 1st financial up-gradation under ACP has been granted to Ex NK/GD Tarlok Masih in the pay scale of Rs.3200-85-4900/- w.e.f. 09.08.1999 and pay fixed vide this office order No. E-6/CRC/224/ACP-MACP/25 Bn/G/15/-3316-19 dated 24.01.2018', learned counsel for petitioner has fairly given up the said relief in view of the revised Pension Payment Order4 dated 24.01.2018 issued by the respondent 4hereinafter referred to as 'PPO' No.5/Commandant, SSB. It is to be noted that learned counsel for petitioner never advanced any arguments qua the same and has further given up the said relief in the written synopsis filed by him. We agree with the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for petitioner, thus, no adjudication qua prayer (a) is required.

3. Although not relevant, it is worthwhile to mention that as per petitioner, prior to receipt of the aforesaid revised PPO dated 24.01.2018, i.e., the grant of benefit of 1st financial upgradation as per ACP scheme, her husband was issued a PPO dated 12.02.2001 by the respondent No.7/Central Pension Accounts Office at the time of his retirement and thence a revised PPO on 01.03.2014 under the 6th Central Pay Commission after his death on 19.08.2011. On both occasions the same has been accepted without any protest or demur.

4. Having perused all the documents on record and after having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are left to adjudicate upon the next contention raised by petitioner qua her late husb