(Open Court)

Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench, Allahabad ****

Original Application No. 1822 of 2012 This the 26^th Day of February, 2026.

HON’BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.

HON’BLE MS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.

Shamimullah Son of late Riyasat Ullah, aged about 68 years, Ticket No.- 5758, Resident of Mohalla Mahmand Garhi, Post Sinjai, District Shahjahanpur.

….Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. S.K. Pandey.

Versus

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence (Production), New Delhi.

2. Director General, Ordnance Factories, Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India, Ordnance Factories Board, 10-

A, Shahid Khudi Ram Bose Road, Kolkata-1.

3. General Manager, Ordnance Clothing Factory, Shahjahanpur (O.C.F.S.).

4. Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pension),Drapaudi Ghat, Allahabad.

...Respondents.

By Advocate: Mr. Amitabh Kumar Sinha.

ORDER By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial)

Mr. S.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Amitabh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 challenging the order dated 11.01.2012 issued by respondent no.3 under Section 5 of the RTI Act and has further prayed for issuance of corrected PPO by allowing the applicant 2nd ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 along with difference of arrears with 18% interest and all consequential benefits. The applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“8.1 issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the order dated 11.01.2012 passed by the respondent no. 3 (Annexure A-1) with all consequential benefits.

8.2 issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to issue corrected P.P.O. and allowing the applicant 2^nd A.C.P. in the pay scale of 5000-8000 alongwith difference of arrears with 18% interest with all consequential benefits.

8.3 issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

8.4 The cost of the application may also be awarded in favour of the applicant.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed as Labour ‘B’ and thereafter promoted in the Tailor cadre from time to time. He was placed in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and subsequently promoted to the post of Tailor/Master Craftsman in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 w.e.f. 20.05.2003. He superannuated from Government service on 30.06.2004. The dispute in the present Original Application relates to non-grant of 2nd financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 and consequential fixation of pension.

4. It is the case of the applicant that he has not been granted the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 and his pay has been fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000. After retirement, when PPO was issued reflecting pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000, though the Pensioner Identity Card initially showed Rs. 5000- 8000, the applicant sought information under the RTI Act. Vide communication dated 11.01.2012, he was informed that his correct pay scale was Rs. 4500-7000 and was advised to move an application for correction of the pensioner identity card. Being aggrieved, he has filed the present Original Application.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was initially trade tested and declared successful for the post of Tailor, however due to administrative reasons he was first appointed as Labour ‘B’ and thereafter appointed/promoted in the Tailor cadre. He was granted the revised pay scales from time to time and ultimately placed in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996.

6. It is submitted that the ACP Scheme was introduced w.e.f. 09.08.1999 providing financial upgradation on completion of 12 and 24 years of regular service in the promotional hierarchy. According to the applicant, earlier revision and merge