CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH Original Application No. 1152/2021 This the Chandigarh, 1^st Day of December, 2025 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)

MES-367629 Sh Megh Raj son of Sh. Kapoor Chand, age. 65 years, retired as Pipe Fitter (HS-II), now resident of VPO Village Dharamgarh, P.O. Lalru, Tehsil Dena Bassi, District Mohali.

.... Applicant (By Advocate: Sh. Harpal Singh proxy for Sh. Rishav Sharma)

Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi-110001

2. Headquarter Chief Engineer, Chandigarh Zone, N Area, Airport Road, Chandigarh-160003

3. The Commander, Works Engineer, MES Ambala Cantt.

4. The Principal Controller, Defence Accounts (Pension), Draupadi Ghat, Allahabad (UP)-211003.

...Respondents (By Advocate: Ms. Swati Arora)

O R D E R

Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:-

(i) That the impugned order Annexure A-1 dated

19.03.2021 and Annexure A-2 dated 30.10.2020 be quashed and set aside.

(ii) It be declared that the applicant is entitled to first ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000 w.e.f. 9.8.1999 and second ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 01.12.2002 which was further revised to Rs. 9300-34800 GP of Rs.4200 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and thereafter 3rd MACP + in the PB of Rs. 9300-34800 with GP of Rs.4600/- w.e.f. 30.11.2008 with all consequential benefits like arrears of pay etc.

(iii) It be further declared that the applicant is entitled to revised pensionary benefits including difference in Leave Encashment, Gratuity and Commutation on account of grant of 1^st and 2^nd ACP and 3^rd MACP from due date along with interest.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the applicant retired as Pipe Fitter (HS-II), Group-C from the Military Engineer Services (MES) on 31.08.2016. He is aggrieved by the denial of financial upgradations under the ACP/MACP Schemes by the respondents. The applicant was initially appointed as Valveman in the respondent department in the pay scale of Rs. 210-290, which was a semi-skilled grade. Subsequently, pursuant to the recommendations of an Expert Committee dated 16.10.1981, various cadres in MES, including the applicant’s cadre, was upgraded to the Skilled category. As the benefit of skilled grade was not granted to the applicant, he approached this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 221-2004, which was allowed vide order dated 22.12.2004, directing the respondents to grant him the skilled pay scale of Rs. 260-400 w.e.f. 16.10.1981 along with all consequential benefits. The said order attained finality after dismissal of CWP No. 11761-CAT-2005 by the Hon’ble High Court on 06.02.2013.

3. The respondents introduced the ACP Scheme w.e.f. 09.08.1999, providing two financial upgradations on completion of 12 and 24 years of service in the absence of regular promotion, and thereafter New MACP Scheme was introduced w.e.f. 01.09.2008, providing three financial upgradations, wherein the applicant became entitled to 3^rd MACP on completion of 30 years service in pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay 4600/-. The respondents treated the applicant’s redesignation from Valveman to Pipe Fitter, which occurred due to cadre restructuring, as his first promotion, and on that basis denied him the benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP and 3rd MACP. The applicant submits that restructuring or redesignation cannot be treated as promotion for the purpose of ACP/MACP, a settled position of law. The respondents continued to treat the applicant as belonging to the semi-skilled category, even though the pay scale of Valveman and Pipe Fitter remained the same and the change was only a result of cadre restructuring. The similarly placed employees filed O.A No.300/HP/2008, decided on 23.08.2010 and O.A No.309/PB/2008, decided on 23.08.2010 in which this Tribunal has held that the up