Past service should be counted for ACP/MACP benefits if it has been protected under pension rules, irrespective of pay grade changes.

JUDGMENT :

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 2240/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal directed the Petitioners to re-determine, by a speaking order, the pay of the Respondent/Sh. Hira Lal as well as his entitlement to benefits under the Assured Career Progression (‘ACP’)/ Modified Assured Career Progression (‘MACP’) Schemes by adding the service rendered by him in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting from 16.06.1989 to 31.07.1991, if not already done.

3. The quintessential facets governing the present dispute are that the Respondent was appointed as Engineering Assistant (‘EA’) in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting and served in the said post from 16.06.1989 till 31.07.1991 in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600.

4. On 01.08.1991, after submitting a technical resignation, the Respondent joined the Delhi Police as ASI (Radio Technician) in the pay scale of Rs. 1600-2660.

5. Subsequently, the pay scale of the post of Engineering Assistant in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting was revised retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.1986, to Rs. 2000-3200. Upon representation by the Respondent to Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, his pay in the said post was re-fixed at Rs. 2,120/- as on 01.06.1991, i.e., prior to his joining the Delhi Police and he was also paid arrears on the revised fixation.

6. Owing to the aforesaid retrospective revision, the Respondent sought pay protection with respect to the post he was working at in the Delhi Police, and made representations with respect to the same. Vide Order dated 16.03.1999, the Petitioners only granted him two annual increments in his present pay grade of Rs.1600-2660/- by taking into account the service of two years rendered by him the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting.

7. Aggrieved, the Respondent filed an O.A. No. 2481/2000, which was allowed vide order dated 18.10.2001 and it was observed that the Petitioner/Authority will have to protect the pay of the Respondent given to him in the revised and upgraded scale of pay of EA and the Petitioners should have proceeded to fix his pay in the pay grade of Rs. 1600-2600 taking into account his pay at Rs. 2,120/-. The relevant extract is reproduced as under: -

4. In order to get over the problem arising in this case for want of necessary clarification as to the rule which should find application, we have had occasion to take a look at the character & service Roll of the applicant produced by the learned counsel for the respondents for our perusal. We have come across the following entry in the aforesaid Roll: "Allowed to avail the benefit of past service rendered in Doordashan Centre from 16.6.1989 to 31.7.1991 as EA and the previous service Book accepted for all intents and purpose under 26(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules vide order No. 16203 - 09/CR/BCE/CH dated 1.6.99."

5. From the above it is seen that the benefit of Rule 26(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 has been fully extended to the applicant. Thus the technical resignation given by him at the time of entry in Delhi Police will not entail forfeiture of his past service as EA in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. This way the service rendered by the applicant in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting has been kept alive for extending certain benefits to the applicant