SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Asha Menon, JJ.
Surender Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 10028 of 2020
Decided On : 19-01-2021




The court ruled that the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of the 2nd MACP scheme, impacted from a specific date, following an authoritative precedent.

Headnote:(A) Right to Equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India - 2nd MACP Scheme - Writ petition seeking direction for implementation of the 2nd MACP for an employee upon completing 20 years of service, benefiting from MACP scheme since 01st January 2006. (Paras 2, 9)

(B) Binding Precedent - Petition covered by prior decision of this Court in W.P.

(C) No.8203/2019, ensuring consistency in legal adjudication.

Findings of Court:
The court emphasizes application of the MACP legitimately, ensuring rightful placement in pay scale and timely disbursement of arrears.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to benefit under the MACP since the stipulated date, given precedence in the same issue by a prior judgment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the need to implement the previous decision, highlighting the importance of consistent application of departmental policies.

Result: Writ petition allowed with specified directions for immediate implementation.

Table of Content
1. procedural matters for judgment execution (Para 1 , 5 , 11)
2. entitlement to the 2nd macp benefit (Para 2 , 3)
3. reference to previous court decision (Para 4 , 6 , 7)
4. coverage of current petition by past judgment (Para 8 , 10)
5. directions for implementing macp benefit (Para 9)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J.1/2 (Oral)

W.P. (C) 10028/2020

1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the Respondent No. 2 to 4 to give the benefit of the 2nd MACP to the Petitioner in the pay scale of Sub-Inspector @ Rs.9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- upon completion of 20 years of regular service with the CRPF, from his respective due date of year by treating the MACP as applicable since 01st January 2006 onwards.

3. Petitioner further prays for a direction to the respondents to pay the arrears in the above terms after rectification of his pay scale along with consequential arrears arising therefrom.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court in W.P. (C) No.8203/2019 in Ex. HC/GD Prahalad vs. Union of India and Ors. vide order dated 13th September, 2019, as modified by order dated 18th September, 2019.

5. Issue notice.

6. Ms. Nidhi Banga, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. She states that five special leave petitions are pending consideration before the Supreme Court on the same issue.

7. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the petitioner states that no SLP is pending against the judgment and order in Ex. HC/GD Prahalad (supra), W.P.(C) No.8203/2019 before the Apex Court.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the prayer in the present petition stands covered by the decision dated 13th September, 2019, as modified by order dated 18th September, 2019, of this Court in W.P.(C) 8203/2019 (Ex.HC/GD Prahalad v. Union of India and batch).

9. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed with the following directions:

(i) The benefit of the 2nd MACP will be given from the date of completion of 20 years of service by treating the MACP scheme as applicable with effect from 1st January 2006 onwards;

(ii) The petitioners will be placed in the appropriate pay scale of SI/HC etc. as the case may be (for e.g. In the case of SIs Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of 4200) from the date of completion of 20 years of regular service;

(iii) The appropriate orders will be issued and the arrears will be paid to the petitioner within a period of 12 weeks, failing which the respondents would be liable to simple interest at 6% per annum on the arrears for the period of delay.

10. Needless to state that the present order will abide by the judgment and order to be passed by the Supreme Court in the pending SLPs, if any, on the same issue.

11. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top