ORDER

Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) This case has come up for hearing with an office objection. Registry is directed to do the needful and remove the office objection and assign a regular OA Number to the instant matter.

Diary No. 2266/2024

2. Vide the instant OA, the applicant seeks the following relief: Case. "a. To quash the impugned letter dated 04.09.2023 in which it is observed that: In this regard CBI HO, DPC Cell New Delhi has submitted that CBI follows the instructions given by DoPT vide para 10 of OM dated 22.10.2019 in which it was mentioned that "Past service rendered by a Central Government employee in a State Government/Statutory Body/Autonomous Body/ Public Sector Organization, before appointment in the Central Government shall not be counted awards regular Service and not given the benefits of MACP counting the past services of the applicants and pass any appropriate order punishing to the respondents authority for disobeying and not complying the order dated 24.08.2023 as directed by this Hon'ble Tribunal. b. To issue order or direction commanding to the respondents to grant the benefits of financial up gradation to the them with reference to the services rendered by them in their parent organization in the law laid down by Coordinates benches of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the matter of Kishan Lal vs. UOI and D.K.Sharma Vs UOI. C. Any other relief which the court deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the d. To award the cost of Original Application."

3. Learned counsel for the applicant points out that this is the second round of litigation. The applicants have requested the respondents to grant the benefit of past services rendered in Uttarakhand Police but the respondents have denied the same to the applicants, even though, they have completed more than 22 28 years of satisfactory service and are entitle to get the benefit of /tem No. S2 Diary No. 2266/2024 ACPIMACP scheme which has been granted to similarly situated persons. He draws attention to the Judgement passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 2348/2021 dated 30.05.2024, where the similarly situated persons have been granted relief. The operative portion of the same reads as under: <br/>

"3. Learned counsel for the applicants states that the present applicants are identically placed to respondents in the W.P.(C), (applicants in 0.A) before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. He states that this O.A. could be disposed of on the analogy of the order of the Tribunal in O.A. No. 2747/2011, which has further been confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the statements made by the Learned Counsel for the applicants.

5. Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed in similar terms. The impugned order dated 15.04.2021 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the claim of the applicants for financial up-gradation, in terms of the MACP scheme disregarding condition No. 10 of the MACP Scheme. The aforementioned exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order."

4. Learned counsel vehemently opposes the grant of relief to the applicants in the instant case and states that the matter requires a counter reply on behalf of the respondents.

5. However, going through the aforementioned judgment, we find that the instant case bears a striking similarity to the Chander Pal case (supra) and judicial propriety and discipline demands that we pass a similar order in similar circumstances. Dlary No. 2266/2024 Item No, S2 A In view of the above this OA is allowed. The impugned order dated 04.09.2023 is quashed and set aside. The competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider the claim of the applicants for financial up-gradation, in terms of the MACP Scheme disregarding condition No. 10 of the MACP Scheme, within a period of 12 weeks f