Notional promotions protected by Supreme Court count as regular service for MACP and NFSG benefits.

O R D E R

By Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)

Heard Shri Jaswant Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Devendra Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents. With the consent of counsel for both the parties, the Original Application is being heard and decided finally at the admission stage itself.

2. The instant Original Application filed by the applicant for the following main relief(s):-

“a) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to hold and declare that the promotion given to the applicants w.e.f. 06-12-2002 by the respondent themselves in terms of various directions issued earlier or in compliance of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court's order dated 02-03-2005 in WP No. 7963/2004 which has been protected by the Hon'ble Apex Court in CA No. 1970- 75/2009 under Para no. 119(22) by the order dated 05.02.2020, now attained finality and cannot be disturbed in any manner and applicants is also eligible for all consequential benefit.

b) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to hold and declare that the applicants have not hit by the provision of the MACP Scheme referred to in the impugned letter/order dated 07.02.2018 & 14.07.2021 issued by the CBIC which have already been quashed and set aside in the Original Application Nos. 1085/2018, 691/2023, 143/2024, 717/20248 937/2024 by this Hon'ble Tribunal.

c) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to hold and declare that the applicants are also eligible for grant of Non Functional Upgradation (NFG) of Rs. 5400/- in PB-2 w.e.f. 06-12-2016 after completion of 4 years regular service in grade pay of Rs.4800/- as they were already awarded the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- w.e.f. 06-12-2012 being identical case of M. Subramaniam vs UOI and others.

d) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding the Respondents no. 0 & 07 to release all the outstanding dues to the applicants herein without any further delay.

e) To direct the Respondents to pay simple interest at the applicable rate on the outstanding amount unlawfully withheld without any valid justification from the date of such amounts became due and payable till the date of actual disbursement.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the grievance of the applicants is that despite their promotion to the post of Inspector having been granted on regular basis w.e.f. 06.12.2002 pursuant to judicial directions and the said promotion having been expressly protected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in D. Raghu v. R. Basaveswarudu, the respondents have arbitrarily refused to grant and/or restore the consequential service benefits flowing therefrom. The applicants were treated as regular Inspectors from 06.12.2002, their pay was fixed accordingly and they were granted 3rd financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in Grade Pay ₹4800/- w.e.f. 06.12.2012 after completing ten years of continuous regular service. Upon further completion of four years in Grade Pay ₹4800/-, they became entitled to Non-Functional Selection Grade (NFSG) in Grade Pay ₹5400/- w.e.f. 06.12.2016. However, the respondents have withheld these benefits by disputing the reckoning of service from 06.12.2002, contrary to binding judicial pronouncements and despite this Tribunal having already granted identical relief to similarly situated employees in O.A. No. 717/2024 and connected matters. The applicants are thus aggrieved by the denial of MACP and NFSG benefits, discriminatory treatment vis-à-vis similarly placed officers and the arbitrary refusal to extend consequential