O R D E R

HON'BLE MR.E.K.BHARAT BHUSHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER OA No.863/2015 is filed by V.S.Joseph, retired employee of CIFNET, Kochi against the denial of second ACP due with effect from 30.01.2008. The reliefs sought in the OA are as follows:

i) Call for the records leading up to the Annexure A5 and quash the same.

ii) To direct the respondents to count the applicant's service rendered on adhoc basis as regular service for the purpose of ACP Scheme and pensionary benefits;

iii) To declare that the Applicant is entitled to be granted 2nd level financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from January, 2008.

iv) To direct the Respondents to take appropriate action to grant the

2nd financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme to the Applicant with effect from January, 2008 and to direct the respondents to disburse the arrears (all consequential arrears of pay and allowances arising therefrom) with interest at the rate of 18%

immediately in the interest of justice.

v) Issue such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. The applicant joined respondents, CIFNET after his name was referred to the respondents by the Employment Exchange. He joined CIFNET on 15.12.1975 after a test and interview for the post of Carpenter on casual basis. As per office order No.F.13-18/83-Adm. Dated 20.01.1984, he was .3.

posted on adhoc basis as Carpenter with effect from 13.01.1984. The copy of the said office order is at Annexure A2. The applicant was declared to have completed his probation on 06.11.1987 and continued in service. He superannuated on 31.10.2008. He was the beneficiary of first level financial upgradation under ACP, granted after completion of 12 years of regular service. Being due for second level financial upgradation after completion 24 years of regular service, the applicant requested for the same by letter dated

20.06.2014 (Annexure A4).

3. The 4th respondent vide communication dated 25.09.2014 rejected the applicant's claim for second level financial upgradation on the ground that he had not completed 24 years of service (Annexure A5). It is stated therein that the applicant was employed on adhoc basis with effect from 13.01.1984 and regularised on 07.11.1985 only. Thus on retirement his regular service did not extend to 24 years.

4. The applicant makes out a case that he had been continuously employed from 15.12.1975. As per a certificate detailing qualifying service as required under Rule 32 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the 4th respondent as on 31.03.2003 had certified that the applicant had completed 23 years 3 months and 3 days service (Annexure A6). Thus the denial of applicant's claim for second level financial upgradation under ACP Scheme is arbitrary and unjustified. His adhoc service from 13.01.1984 is to be included .4.

as qualifying service while assessing his eligibility for ACP. The 4th respondent was wrong in refusing him the benefit. The applicant had completed the qualifying service of 28 years and 7 months at the time of retirement, if we take the service in Annexure A6 into account.

5. The Madras Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No.105/2010 had ruled that if a person possesses required qualification for being appointed to a particular post and is appointed with the approval and consultation of appropriate authority, such appointment cannot be held to be adhoc and the Tribunal had ordered for grant of benefits under ACP Scheme. The Tribunal had arrived at such a finding on the basis of the judgments delivered to this effect by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rudra Kumar Sain and Ors v. UOI and Ors. Reported in 2001 SLJ 1. Further in the judgment in W.P.No.5876/2008 a Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court had also held the view that service rendered on adhoc is also to be counted for the purpose of granting ACP Scheme. Further, Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in order dated 27.01.2012 in OA No.3184/2010, had