(Cause-title is taken from Case Information System)

C.A.V. Order

1. The present petition has been filed as the petitioner is aggrieved by the illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable action of the respondent authorities in denying the benefit of 3rd MACP to the petitioner, despite completion of 30 years of regular service. The petitioner contends that such denial is contrary to the provisions of the MACP Scheme as introduced pursuant to the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission and further clarified by circular dated 05.10.2016. It is the case of the petitioner that under the said scheme, an employee is entitled to financial upgradation on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of continuous service, irrespective of any punishment, provided the employee has not been granted regular promotions due to reasons not attributable to him. The scheme is intended to mitigate stagnation in service by granting monetary benefits in the form of higher grade pay, rather than actual promotion. Despite fulfilling all requisite conditions and being eligible for the 3rd MACP, the petitioner has been deprived of the said benefit without any justifiable reason. The action of the respondents, therefore, defeats the very object and purpose of the scheme and has resulted in financial loss and prejudice to the petitioner. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking following reliefs :

“10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent authorities to give benefit of 3rd MACP on completion of 30 years of service i.e from 22.03.2018. Further respondents may be directed to give all consequential benefits, including arrears of pay, pensionary benefits, on the basis of re-fixation of pay with interest in the interest of justice.

10.2 That this Hon'ble court may be further pleased to pass any other consequential and other orders/ writs which this Hon'ble court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Facts of the case, as canvased are that, the petitioner was appointed as a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) on 21.03.1998 and continued to serve the department with diligence and sincerity until attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2022. During his service tenure, the petitioner fulfilled all requisite conditions for career advancement. By order dated 05.02.2005, the petitioner was declared qualified for promotion to the post of Head Constable (HC/GD) after successfully completing the prescribed promotional cadre course. Despite having qualified for promotion at an early stage, the petitioner was not extended the benefit of promotion by the respondent authorities for reasons best known to them. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner submitted representations dated 20.06.2009 and 17.11.2014 before the competent authorities, requesting grant of promotional benefits, implementation of the 6th Pay Commission recommendations, and financial upgradations under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. However, no effective action was taken on the said representations, and the petitioner continued to be deprived of the legitimate service benefits. Subsequently, pursuant to the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, the Central Government introduced the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme, which provided for three financial upgradations on completion of 10, 20, and 30 years of regular service, in cases where regular promotions were not granted. The said scheme was implemented in CISF with effect from 01.09.2008. In terms of the said scheme, the petitioner was granted certain benefits of MACP vide order dated 24.09.2015. Thereafter, the respondent authorities issued Circular No. 9/2016 dated 05.10.2016, followed by a clarificatory memo dated 07.06.2017, wherein it was directed that cases of serving as well as retired personnel who had been denied financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme due to adverse entries or punishm