Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Shri Manish Garg, J, Shri Rajinder Kashyap, A
Sh. Sunil Kumar Gaur – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the applicants and their claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments for macp benefits. (Para 5) |
| 3. counterarguments by respondents. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's analysis of the macp scheme. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. decision on entitlement for macp benefits. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 6. final orders and directions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
ORDER
Since the issue involved in both the OAs are identical and the reliefs claimed are also same based on the similar grounds and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we proceed to dispose of both the OAs by this common order.
3. By filing the OA No.947/2022 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-
B. To issue any other order or direction which this Hon‟ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
4. Brief facts of the case leading to filing of this OA are that the applicant was initially appointed under the respondents as Switch Board Attendant on 15.1.1983. After completion of 12 years, the applicant was granted 1st financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (in short „ACP Scheme‟), whi
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
