ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) In the instant Original Application, the applicant seeks the following relief(s):-

“(1) To quash & set aside the order dated 13.06.2016 to the extent that the benefit of 2nd MACP is being granted to the applicant w.e.f. 01.04.2015 instead of 15.02.2014 and to further direct the respondent that benefit of 2nd MACP Scheme be granted to the applicant 15.02.2014 with all consequential benefit including pay & allowance and arrears thereof.

(ii) To quash & set aside the order dated 27.05.2008 to the extent that the benefit under ACP is being granted to the applicant w.e.f.

01.02.2007 instead of 15.02.2006 and to further direct the respondent that benefit of ACP Scheme be granted to the applicant 15.02.2006 with all consequential benefit including pay & allowance and arrears thereof.

(iii) To quash and set-aside the order dated 23.06.2016 whereby the representation of applicant dated 10.05.2016 has been rejected.

Or/and (iv) Any other relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper and in the interest of justice may also be awarded to the applicant.”

2. To substantiate the relief sought in the OA, the learned counsel for the applicant would contend that it is undisputed fact that the applicant was imposed with penalty of censure vide order dated 01.02.2002, the effect of which would have been ended after expiry of six months from the date of imposition of penalty, which would have expired on 31.07.2002. It is not in dispute that the applicant did not challenge the said punishment of censure. The applicant’s case was submitted to the Screening Committee which met on 28.09.2007 and 15.10.2007 for considering the names of S.I.s (Exe.) for grant financial up-gradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (Financial Up-gradation from the Pay Scale of Rs. 5500-9000 to the Pay Scale of Rs. 6500-10500) maturing between 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2006, wherein the applicant’s name was considered but was declared unfit due to his indifferent service record and non-

achievement of bench mark.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents, at this stage, would draw attention that the applicant was declared unfit in terms of para 3 of circular dated 07.02.2005. For better appreciation, we reproduce the circular as under:-

“The following principles shall be observed, in future, while holding Departmental Promotion Committee for admission of names to promotion lists:-

i) The DPC should assess the suitability of the employees for promotion on the basis of their Service records with particular reference to the Confidential Reports for five preceding years irrespective of the qualifying service prescribed in the Servicel Recruitment rules. Officers having at least three 'good and above' reports without any 'below average' or 'adverse' report, even for a small period during last five years may be empanelled. (If more than one CR has been written for a particular year, all the CRs for relevant year shal: be considered together as the CR for one year) ii) The service record of the officer during preceding 10 years in that particular rank shall be taken into account with particular reference to the gravity and continuity of punishment till date. Punishment on counts of corruption and moral turpitude are to be viewed seriously.

iii) Officers who have been awarded any major/minor punishment in the preceding 5 years on charges of corruption, moral turpitude and gross dereliction of duty to protect government property or major punishment within 2 years on charges of administrative lapses, from the date of consideration may not be empanelled.

iv) Officers whose names stand on Secret List shall not be considered fit as per S.O. No. 265 on the subject.

v) Officers who have been awarded censure(s) during the last 6 months can be allowed to be brought on promotion list.

However, the effect of censure debarring the official for promotion for s