WP 18630/2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

W.P.No.18630 /2019 (S-CAT)

BETWEEN:

1.

The Union of India,

Represented by the Secretary,

Ministry of Railways,

Railway Board,

New Delhi-110 001.

2.

The General Manager,

South Western Railway,

Hubli-580 001.

3.

The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer,

South Western Railway,

Mysore Division,

Mysuru-570 001.

… PETITIONERS

(By Sri Abhinay.Y.T., Advocate)

AND:

D.M.Rudreshi,

Son of T.Mallappa,

Aged about 50 years,

Reservation Supervisor I,

Bengaluru Division,

WP 18630/2019

2

South Western Railway,

Bengaluru-560 023.

… RESPONDENT

(Respondent Served)

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the

Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated

05.09.2018 passed in OA No.400 of 2016 passed by the

Central Administrative Tribunal Bengaluru (Annexure-D) and

consequently dismiss the application in its entirety, etc.

This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this

day, Satish Chandra Sharma J., made the following:

ORDER

1.

The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

05.09.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal

(CAT) in O.A.No.170/00400/2016, by which the CAT has

directed the grant of benefit of Modified Assured Career

Progression (MACP) on completion of ten years from the date

of his last promotion as Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk

Grade-II.

2.

Inspite of service of notice, there is no representation

on behalf of the respondent. Earlier also on 17.02.2021, no

one has appeared on behalf of the respondent, and therefore,

WP 18630/2019

3

the matter is being heard finally at the motion hearing stage

itself. A memo has also been filed by the learned Counsel for

the Union of India informing that the respondent does not

intend to pursue the matter and he has written a letter on

25.01.2021 to the authorities that he does not intend to

pursue the matter as he has automatically received the

benefit of MACP in January 2021. However, as there is a

judicial order passed by the CAT, the matter has to be

brought to a logical conclusion.

3.

The facts of the case reveal that the respondent-

employee was appointed as a Ticket Collector on 22.04.1991.

He was promoted as Senior Ticket Collector on 23.06.1998.

He was again promoted to the post of Enquiry-cum-

Reservation Clerk Grade-II on 12.02.1999, and thereafter,

finally to the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk Grade-I

on 30.06.2005. The employee in question filed the Original

Application before the CAT claiming upgradation in the pay

scale on account of MACP Scheme. The MACP Scheme was

introduced in the department for upgradation of pay scale for

those employees who were languishing in the same pay scale

WP 18630/2019

4

without getting the benefit of promotion. The CAT has allowed

the application by holding that the promotion of the employee

to the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk Grade-I was on

account of a limited departmental examination and it will not

come in the way of the upgradation. It has been held that the

promotion on the basis of a limited departmental examination

is not a promotion at all, but it is a selection.

4.

In the considered opinion of this Court, whether it is a

selection based on a limited departmental examination or

whether it is a promotion based upon some departmental

examination, the net result is that the employee gets a higher

pay scale and the main object of MACP is to ensure that the

employees who are continuing in the same pay scale are

granted the benefit of higher pay scale, and therefore, in the

considered opinion of this Court, the CAT has erred in law in

law and on facts in not treating the promotion of an employee

to the