Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Ravi Ranjan, Sujit Narayan Prasad, JJ.
Yogeshwar Ram - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary and ors. – Respondents
L.P.A. No.74 of 2022
Decided On : 15-09-2022
The writ petitioner claimed entitlement for 1st and 2nd ACP under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. The State contended that the benefit of higher pay scale was granted for a limited period and had been withdrawn. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the writ petitioner was not entitled for upgradation in the pay scale under the ACP Scheme. The appellant argued that the Single Judge failed to appreciate the difference between the replacement scale and the principle of upgradation under the ACP Scheme. The respondent defended the order by stating that the writ petitioner had already been granted the benefit of replacement scale. The Court found that the writ petitioner was entitled to the 1st upgradation under the ACP Scheme and that the denial of the claim was improper. The Court also held that the writ petitioner was not entitled to the 3rd upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme due to superannuation prior to its implementation.
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
The instant intra-court appeal preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 07.10.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.4933 of 2014, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 05.12.2013 passed by the respondent no.2, by which, the writ petitioner’s claim for grant of 2nd ACP in the scale of Rs.14,300-18,300/- was rejected, has been refused to be interfered with by dismissing the writ petition.
2. The brief facts of the case which are required to be enumerated reads as under :
The writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Registrar on 11.08.1978 and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 01.03.2008 from the post of Deputy Registrar. The writ petitioner claimed that he has completed 12 years of service on 11.08.1990 and 24 years of service on 11.08.2002 and as such, he became entitled for 1st upgradation in pay scale under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme w.e.f. 09.08.1999 in the scale of Rs.12,000-16,500/-and 2nd ACP w.e.f. 11.08.2002 in the next higher scale of Rs.14,300-18,300/-.
It is the case of the writ petitioner that he has moved before the Patna High Court by filing the writ petition being CWJC No.13339 of 2004 for issuance of direction for promotion to the post of Senior Selection Grade. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to decide the issue in accordance with law. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed by the Patna High Court, the respondent authorities vide order dated 14.12.2006, has allowed the promotion in Senior Selection Grade in the scale of Rs.3700-5000/-with replacement scale of Rs.12000-16500/-w.e.f. 01.12.1992.
It is the contention of the writ petitioner that scheme of grant of Selection Grade has been abolished w.e.f. 01.01.1996 vide Finance Department Resolution No.660 dated 08.02.1999 and as per the Scheme pertaining to Assured Career Progression Scheme dated 14.08.2002 and subsequent amendment having been notified on 23.03.2006, implemented w.e.f. 09.08.1999, by which, Rule 3(1) has been added, whereby, it has been mentioned that any benefit granted under Selection Grade prior to 01.01.1996 cannot be considered to be benefit granted under ACP.
The writ petitioner, therefore, has claimed himself entitled for 1st as well as 2nd ACP w.e.f. 09.08.1999 and 11.08.2002 respectively, in the next higher scale of Rs.14300-18300/-.
The aforesaid grievance having not been redressed, therefore, the writ petitioner had preferred writ petition being W.P.(S) No.4933 of 2014 taking the ground that after abolition of the scheme of Time Bound Promotion/Selection Grade on acceptance of recommendation of 5th Pay Revision Committee, the writ petitioner was entitled for grant of upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme but the same has not been extended, therefore, a direction has been sought for from this Court upon the respondents to grant writ petitioner the benefit of upgradation (both) under the Assured Career Progression Scheme.
While on the other hand, State has taken the plea by taking aid of one notification being notification no.3641 dated 14.12.2006 issued by the Co-operative Department, Erstwhile State of Bihar, in compliance to the order passed in CWJC No.13339 of 2004, the writ petitioner was granted higher pay scale of Rs.3700-5000/-for the period from 01.12.1992 to 31.12.1995. Further, ground has been taken by making reference of order, as contained in memo no.660 dated 08.02.1999 of the Finance Department of the Erstwhile State of Bihar, whereby, the provision of benefit of higher pay scale of the post of Senior Selection Grade has been withdrawn.
According to the State, since the benefit of higher pay scale was granted to the writ petitioner for a limited period from 01.12.1992 to 31.12.1995 to the pay scale of Rs.3700-5000/-and after the order of the Finance Department, Bihar, Patna, the said benefit
The Court clarified the difference between the replacement scale and upgradation in pay scale under the Assured Career Progression Scheme, emphasizing that the revision in pay scale is distinct from ....
The court affirmed applicants' entitlement to financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme, emphasizing eligibility due to completion of service years despite the introduction of....
The court established that employees in isolated posts are entitled to financial upgradations under the ACPS and MACPS, and that any discriminatory treatment in awarding these benefits violates const....
Eligibility for financial upgradation is contingent on fulfilling established educational qualifications; lacking such qualifications disallows claims for parity in benefits.
Financial upgradation under the Revised Assured Career Progression Scheme is warranted upon completion of 30 years of service, irrespective of subsequent promotions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that pay scale rationalization should be ignored for the purpose of the first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme, based on the application ....
The court ruled that employees who have not received promotions are entitled to ACP-II and MACP-III benefits, despite clarifications suggesting otherwise.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
