Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi Order reserved on: 05.02.2026 Order pronounced on: 24.02.2026 Hon’ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Hon’ble Sh. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

Smt. Saroj Gupta (Aged 52 years)

Post: Office-cum-Clerk Mate) (Group C)

W/o Jai Bhagwan Gupta Office Clerk/Mate DDA, W.D-15, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015.

....Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. G.L.Verma)

Versus

1. Delhi Development Authority Through its Vice Chairman, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110003.

2. The Commissioner (Personnel), Delhi Development Authority Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110003.

3. The Executive Engineer WD-15, DDA, Lakkar Mandi, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015.

... Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. Piyush Gaur)

ORDER By Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking following relief:

“(a) To direct the Respondents to grant 1st ACP from 09.08.1999 and re-structure/re-fix the subsequent ACP/MACP in accordance with rules.

(b) To direct the Respondents to withdraw the impugned orders dated 04.09.2018 and 29.09.2018 and allow 1st ACP from 09.08.1998 considering the past services with consequential benefits.

(c) To pass any other order or orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the interest of justice.”

2. Factual Matrix

2.1 The applicant joined as Mate (Work Charge) [(W/C)] with the respondents – Delhi Development Authority (DDA) w.e.f. 08.06.1984. As per the respondents submission in their counter affidavit in para 4.1 the applicant joined as such on 06.03.1984 whereas applicant in the list of events has mentioned that he has been appointed as Mate (W/C) on 08.06.1984. Applicant was allowed to join duty on 22.06.1998 after remaining absent from duty from 01.12.1987 to 20.06.1998 vide EO No.77 dated 30.06.1998 subject to the condition that regularization of the said absence period will be examined separately. The disciplinary proceedings under Regulation No.96 of DDA (Salaries, Allowances and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1964 as well as Regulation of 1999 was initiated against the applicant vide order dated 27.05.1999. The Inquiry Officer (IO) conducted the disciplinary proceedings and submitted his enquiry report on 27.11.2000 and held that the charges were not proved. The competent authority, i.e., Executive Engineer WD-13 of DDA passed the following order in the said disciplinary case:

“AND whereas the IO report was forwarded to Smt. Saroj bala, mate W/C vide No. F.1(269)CB/WD- 13/DDA/20001/681 dt 14.9.2000 and Smt. Saroj Balaa Mate has submitted her reply vide letter dt 20.09.2001 Dy.2106.

AND whereas the undersigned being the disciplinary Authority after careful consideration of the facts on record, the IO report and reply furnished by Smt. Saroj Bala Mate W/C that the ends of justice will be met when the charges leveled against her are dropped and she is exonerated from charges leveled against her period of absence from 1.12.87 to 20.6.98 will be treated as extra ordinary leave with break in service for all purposes.”

2.2 On the same file vide noting dated 30.09.2015, the Consultant (F&A) has suggested that the leave granted by the competent authority may please got reviewed with reference to CCS (Leave) Rules-12. The Consultant (F&A) has given further suggestion that:

“As per clarification given by DoPT vide OM dated 18.07.2001 (Point-54), all kinds of leave will count towards regular service for the purpose of grant of financial upgradations under ACPS. The break in service under FR- 17(A) incurs only three specific disabilities as specified in the relevant FR. It does not affect the normal regular promotions as per clarification given by DoPT vide OM dated 18.7.2001 (Point-49). Consequently it will have no effect on financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme.

Further, as per Para-11 of Annexure-1 of MACPS, ‘Regular service’ shall include all periods spent on deputation/ foreign service, study leave and all other kind of