Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
S Sujatha, Member(J), Sanjiv Kumar, Member(A)
I.Jeyabalan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's service history from bcb to mes (Para 2) |
| 2. applicant's arguments on acp/macp eligibility (Para 3) |
| 3. respondents' counterarguments on exam and acrs (Para 4) |
| 4. mes exam not mandatory for acp/macp (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. uncommunicated acrs cannot bar benefits (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. 30 years service entitles 3rd macp (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 7. direct grant of acp/macp with pay revision (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
ORDER (ORAL)
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant has filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
“(a) direct the Respondents to grant I ACP, & II ACP & III MACP to the applicant by counting the services rendered by the applicant in Beas Project with eligible pay with all consequential benefits in interest of justice and equity. and
b) pass any other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Tribunal including an order for award of cost in the interest of justice and fair play.”
2. The applicant claims that initially he was appointed as Section Officer (Mechanical) in Beas Construction Board (BCB), Sunder Nagar (H.P.) on 13.12.1972. Subsequent to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court
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
