$~108 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 5^th November, 2024 + W.P.(C) 10133/2015 G.P. SOTI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. B.P. Singh, Mr. Anuj Kumar, Ms. Rishabha Singh and Mr. Nakul Nirwan, Advocates.

versus THE PRINCIPAL DEEN DAYAL UPADHYAY COLLEGE AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Beenashaw N. Soni and Ms. Ann Jospeh, Advocates for the College/R-1.

Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal and Ms. Aishwarya Malhotra, Advocates for University of Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

JUDGMENT

JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the Petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India laying a challenge to the decision taken by the University of Delhi granting him 3^rd Financial Upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP) in PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-. Direction is sought to the Respondents to grant MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- in PB-3 with consequential arrears.

2. Factual matrix to the extent relevant is that Petitioner joined Deen Dayal Upadhyaya College (‘College’) on 07.09.1992 as a Professional Assistant and worked on the same post till the date of his superannuation in July, 2024. Petitioner avers that since no promotion was granted to him even Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10133/2015 Page 1 of 7 on 30 years of continuous service, he was entitled for financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) and thereafter under the MACP Scheme.

3. Petitioner states that he was granted 1^st ACP in Rs.8000-13500/- w.e.f. 07.09.2004 on completion of 12 years of regular service and consequent to pay revision under 6^th CPC, his pay was fixed in PB-2 (Rs.9300-34800/-) with AGP of Rs.5400/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006. Government of India introduced the MACP Scheme vide DoPT O.M. dated 19.05.2009 effective from 01.09.2008 which entitled the Central Government employees three financial upgradations on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of regular service from the direct entry grade provided the employee spends 10 years continuously in the same Grade Pay. On completion of 20 years of regular service from the date of direct entry, Petitioner was considered for grant of 2^nd financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and on being found fit was placed in PB-3 (Rs.15600-39100/-) with AGP of Rs. 5400/-.

4. The grievance of the Petitioner, as ventilated in the writ petition is that Petitioner stagnated in the post of Professional Assistant throughout his service of 30 years and therefore while considering his case for 2^nd financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme, which envisages upgradation in immediate next higher Grade Pay in the hierarchy of revised Pay Bands and Grade Pay as given in CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 (‘2008 Rules’), Petitioner deserved to be placed in PB-3 with AGP of Rs.6600/-, whereas he was given AGP of Rs.5400/-. The argument is that paragraph 8.1 in Annexure-1 of MACP Scheme, on which the University has placed reliance and which provides that Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-2 and in PB-3 shall Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10133/2015 Page 2 of 7 be treated as separate Grade Pays, is inapplicable to the Petitioner who has been stagnating without a single promotion. DoPT O.M. dated 06.10.2010 stipulates that paragraph 2 of the MACP Scheme envisages merely placement in the next higher pay and therefore, the staffs in certain departments who are already in the Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- should be legitimately placed in Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- in PB-3 on fulfilment of stipulated years of regular service.

5. Learned counsels for the Respondents jointly submit that Petitioner was appointed as Professional Assistant w.e.f. 07.09.1992 and was granted 1^st ACP w.e.f. 07.09.2004 in the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500/- on completion of 12 years of regular service. Consequent upon implementation of 6^th CPC, Petitioner’s pay was fixed in revised Pay Band of Rs.9300- 34800/- (PB-2)