SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1645

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
OM PRAKASH -VII, Judicial Member, MOHAN PYARE, Administrative Member
Parachute Factory Employees Union, Kanpur – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application No. 330/00685 of 2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri S.J Ishtiaque
For the Respondents: Shri Arvind Singh

Cadre restructuring placement of Highly Skilled Workers from GP Rs.2400 to Rs.2800 held as fitment, not promotion; entitles MACP upgradation to GP Rs.4200; parity mandated for similarly situated employees.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Cadre restructuring of artisan staff in defence establishments w.e.f. 01.01.2006 - Placement of 50% Highly Skilled Workers from Grade Pay Rs.2400 to Rs.2800 as one-time measure without trade test - MoD letters dated 01.12.2010 and 20.06.2011 treating such placement as promotion for ACP/MACP purposes quashed - Placement held as fitment, not promotion - Entitlement to financial upgradation to Grade Pay Rs.4200 under MACP Scheme upheld following precedent judgments where similar view affirmed by High Court and Supreme Court. (Paras 2, 6, 10, 11, 14)

(B) Service Law - ACP/MACP Schemes - Principles of parity and non-discrimination - Benefits granted to similarly situated employees in earlier judgments binding on others - Judgments in rem applicable to all equals; refusal to extend benefits results in discrimination violative of equal protection. (Paras 11, 12)

(C) Precedents - Binding nature - Tribunal judgments upheld by High Court and Supreme Court on identical issue attain finality; coordinate benches follow ratio to avoid conflicting decisions. (Paras 6, 11)

Facts of the case:
Trade union and affected employee challenged MoD orders treating cadre restructuring placement of Highly Skilled Workers from Grade Pay Rs.2400 to Rs.2800 as promotion, denying MACP upgradation to Rs.4200. Relied on prior CAT orders (Hyderabad and Principal Benches) upheld upto Supreme Court, quashing identical orders.

Findings of Court:
Impugned orders quashed; respondents directed to extend benefits as in precedent case - financial upgradation to Grade Pay Rs.4200 for Highly Skilled Workers (Rs.2400/2800) under MACP, exercise within three months.

Issues: Whether cadre restructuring placement constitutes promotion for ACP/MACP; entitlement to parity with employees benefited by binding precedents; validity of denying upgradation post-scale merger.

Ratio Decidendi: Cadre restructuring placement is fitment, not promotion, ignoring for MACP reckoning; similarly situated employees entitled to uniform treatment per settled service jurisprudence against discrimination among equals.

Result: Original Application allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicants challenge cadre restructuring letters denying macp benefits. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents defend promotion treatment for acp/macp denial. (Para 3 , 4)
3. restructuring placement is fitment, not promotion. (Para 5)
4. applicants cite prior cat/high court/supreme court precedents. (Para 6 , 7)

Reserved on 10.02.2026.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD This is the 13th day of February, 2026.

Original Application No. 330/00685 of 2014 HON’BLE MR JUSTICE OM PRAKASH -VII, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MR. MOHAN PYARE, MEMBER (A)

1. Parachute Factory Employees Union, Kanpur a Trade Union, registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 represented by its General Secretary Sunil Kumar Sahu S/o Sri Kalicharan resident of MI 342 Barra –II, Sabji Mandi Kanpur, PIN

208027.

2. Rajeev Kumar Parashar S/o Ram Sanehi Lal Parashar resident of B-4/101/Type – II New Defence Colony, G.T. Road, Kanpur PIN 208013.

.Applicants By Adv : Shri S.J Ishtiaque V E R S U S

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Department of Defence Production & Supplies, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. Directorate of Ordnance (Coordination & Services) Kalkata MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA 10, A, Shaheed Khudi Ram Bose Road, Kalkata.

3. The General Manager, Ordnance Parachute Factory, Napiar Road, Cantt, Kanpur Nagar.

4. The Secretary Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances &

Pensions Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi 110001.

5. Chairman & Managing Director, Gliders India Limited, Kanpur.

. . . Respondents By Adv: Shri Arvind Singh (O R D E R)

BY JUSTICE OM PRAKASH -VII, MEMBER (J)

The present O.A has been filed by the applicant under section

19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking following reliefs:-

(i) This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to quash the orders dated 20.06.2011 and 01.12.2010 and pass same order which is passed in similar circumstances in OA No. 1401 of 2012 on

30.8.2013.

(ii) This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct to the respondents to give all consequential benefits to the applicants on the basis of aforesaid direction.

(iii) To pass any order which this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit under the circumstances of the case.

(iv) To award cost in favour of the applicant”.

2. The brief facts of the OA are as follows:-

Applicant No.1 is a registered Trade Union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, and Applicant No.2 is an office bearer of the Union and one of the affected employees, on whose behalf the present Original Application has been filed. The cadre of Artisan staff in Defence Establishments was restructured with effect from MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

01.01.2006 by order of the Hon’ble President of India. As a one- time measure, employees were placed in higher grades without any trade test. Later, by letters dated 01.12.2010 and 20.06.2011, the respondents treated the placement of Highly Skilled Workers from Grade Pay Rs.2400 to Rs2800 as a promotion and, on that basis, denied them financial upgradation under the ACP/MACP Scheme.

In similar circumstances, the CAT, Hyderabad Bench, held that such placement on restructuring is not a promotion and employees are entitled to financial upgradation. This view was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court and finally by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Following the same principle, the CAT, Principal Bench in OA No. 4101/2012 quashed the letters dated 01.12.2010 and 20.06.2011 and held that Highly Skilled Workers in Grade Pay Rs.2400/2800 are entitled to Grade Pay Rs.4200 on second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme. Despite this clear judgment, the respondents did not grant the benefit to the applicants. Therefore, the present Original Application has been filed.

3. Per contra, the respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating therein that as per Ministry of Defence letters dated 01.12.2010 and 20.06.2011, issued in consultation with the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), the placement of 50% of the existing Highly Skill

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top