IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

216 Date of decision: 08.07.2025 SATPAL SINGH ......Petitioner VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - Mr. Rajesh Sehgal, Advocate and Ms. Disha Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Garima Kuthiala Prashar, Advocate for Mr. Chander Mohan Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5-Union of India.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 28.06.2018 whereby the claim of Second ACP Financial Upgradation dated 15.02.2017 was denied to the petitioner since he did not possess the essential qualification for the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner was enrolled in the Border Security Force (BSF) on 15.02.1983 and he successfully underwent training at STC BSF Kharga Camp, whereupon he was assigned the trade of General Duty with 22 BN BSF unit. The petitioner is claimed to have rendered unblemished service during his tenure with the respondent-authorities. It is further contended that the respondent-authorities had notified the grant of ACP/Financial upgradation to employees upon completion of the specified period of service. The petitioner submitted an application in August 2015 to the Company Commander seeking grant of the financial upgradation as per the scheme. However, the said representation was rejected by the respondents vide order dated 10.09.2015 on account of the petitioner not possessing the prescribed educational qualification on 15.10.2011 when the ACP Scheme was in force. The petitioner retired from service on 16.04.2016 and thereafter served a notice of demand dated 19.02.2018 praying for the grant of the benefit of financial upgradation on the ground that the reasons recorded earlier were factually incorrect and, accordingly, prayed for its setting aside, while reiterating his entitlement to the benefit of the Second Financial Upgradation under the ACP Scheme in the scale of Rs. 5500-175-

9000.

3. The respondents, vide their communication dated 28.06.2018, declined the petitioner’s claim on the ground that the benefit of financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme is available to a BSF personnel upon completion of 12 to 24 years of service and only on fulfillment of promotional conditions. For seeking the Second ACP on completion of 24 years of service, possession of educational qualification equivalent to matriculation was essential, which the petitioner did not possess.

4. It was noted that the petitioner passed his BSF First Class, which is equivalent to matriculation, on 15.10.2011 i.e. on a date after the ACP Scheme became inapplicable. The petitioner had also not cleared the mandatory courses required for promotion to a higher rank, namely MR STD-1st and PPC List D.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner relies upon the Office Memorandum No. 35034/1/97-Establishment (D) dated 09.08.1999 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and contends that the above Short Career Progression Scheme for Central Government Civilian Employees, which has been relied upon in the impugned communication dated 28.06.2018, does not prescribe that clearance of BSF First Class or matriculation qualification is mandatory for grant of financial upgradation. He submits that, in terms of Clause VI of the said Office Memorandum, a person is only required to fulfill the normal promotional norms for entitlement to benefits under the ACP Scheme. The qualification stipulated in the impugned communication, therefore, is not supported by the said Office Memorandum and hence rejection of his claim is liable to be set aside. The relevant extract thereof reads thus:-

“6. Fulfillment of normal promotion norms (bench-

mark, departmental examination, seniority-cum-fitness in the case of Group 'D' employees, etc.) for gr