Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Training Period Counting - The majority of sources agree that training periods, especially when the employee is granted regular pay and increments during training, are now considered as part of qualifying service for MACP benefits ["Gyan Prakash Tiwari vs General Manager E C Rly - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Laxman Prasad Meena vs Northern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["INDCAT00044733"]. The Railway Board's circulars and judicial decisions affirm that training periods, if treated as continuous service with regular pay, should be counted towards MACP eligibility, including the 10, 20, and 30-year benchmarks ["Gyan Prakash Tiwari vs General Manager E C Rly - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Laxman Prasad Meena vs Northern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["INDCAT00044733"].
Judicial and Administrative Clarifications - Courts and tribunals have consistently held that training periods with regular pay and increments are to be counted as qualifying service for MACP, and this is now settled law (no more res integra) ["Laxman Prasad Meena vs Northern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["INDCAT00044733"]. The Railway Board's instructions, such as Circular No.215/2009 and the clarification from DoPT, support counting of training time when regular pay and increments are granted ["Gyan Prakash Tiwari vs General Manager E C Rly - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Laxman Prasad Meena vs Northern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"].
Exceptions and Specific Cases - Pre-appointment training and ad hoc/contract service before regular appointment are generally excluded from MACP counting ["Bhagwan Singh vs M/o Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Surender Kumar vs North Western Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Surender Kumar vs Union of India through The General Manager North Western Railway Jaipur - Central Administrative Tribunal"]. For casual or temporary service, the rules specify that only a percentage (often 50%) of temporary status service may be counted, primarily for pension benefits, but not always for MACP benefits ["Sushil Kumar Singh vs North Eastern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Surender Kumar vs North Western Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"].
Service in Different Departments and Breaks - Past continuous regular service in another government department without a break can be counted towards MACP, but service on ad hoc or contract basis before regular appointment typically is not eligible ["Bhagwan Singh vs M/o Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Laxman Ram vs M/o Railways - Central Administrative Tribunal"].
Overall Conclusion - The prevailing legal and administrative stance, supported by judicial rulings and Railway Board instructions, is that training periods with regular pay and increments should be counted as qualifying service for MACP benefits. However, service on ad hoc, contract, or pre-appointment training basis generally does not qualify unless explicitly specified. This interpretation aligns with recent decisions and circulars, clarifying that training with regular increments is integral to service counting for MACP eligibility ["Gyan Prakash Tiwari vs General Manager E C Rly - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["Laxman Prasad Meena vs Northern Railway - Central Administrative Tribunal"], ["INDCAT00044733"].
Railway employees often face uncertainty when calculating their service length for financial upgradations under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme. A common question arises: whether training period will be counted as regular service for granting MACP in railway? This issue impacts promotions, increments, and arrears, especially for those who underwent initial or in-service training post-appointment.
In this post, we break down the legal position, drawing from railway manuals, office memorandums (OMs), and court rulings. While this provides general insights, consult a legal expert for your specific case, as outcomes may vary based on individual circumstances.
Generally, yes—the training period qualifies as regular service for MACP eligibility in the railway department, provided it is in-service training undergone during the service period as per appointment conditions and relevant railway manuals. Courts have consistently held that such training cannot be excluded from the length of service for financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme (predecessor to MACP), and the same principles apply to MACP. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174
Key points include:- In-service training periods, as stipulated in job advertisements and appointment letters, count towards ACP/MACP benefits.- The MACP Scheme defines 'regular service' starting from joining a direct entry grade on a regular basis, excluding only ad-hoc/contract service or pre-appointment training—implying post-joining training is reckonable. Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195Union of India VS Utpal Saikia - 2017 0 Supreme(Gau) 795- Railway-specific rulings affirm this, referencing the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM) and circulars. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174
The MACP Scheme, introduced via Railway Board’s RBE No. 101/2009 (OM dated 19.05.2009), grants financial upgradation after 10, 20, and 30 years of regular service, differing slightly from ACP's 12/24/36 years but retaining core logic.
Service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning. Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195Union of India VS Utpal Saikia - 2017 0 Supreme(Gau) 795 This clause explicitly excludes pre-appointment phases but is silent on in-service training, allowing it to form part of continuous regular service post-joining.
Tribunals have reinforced this: Treating of training period as regular service for the purpose of granting ACP/MACP is no more a res integra. This Tribunal held the same view in OA No. 763 of 2014. Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3400 In another case, a trainee ASM appointed in 1984 successfully claimed 3rd MACP by including training as continuous service, with the Tribunal quashing denial and directing grant from 30.04.2020 with arrears. Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3400
A pivotal railway case addressed denial of ACP upgradation by excluding training. The court ruled: the training obtained by the employees during their service period, as per the advertisement and appointment conditions, should be counted for the purpose of counting the length of service. It dismissed writs against the Tribunal's order, citing IREM, Apprenticeship Act, 1961, and circulars. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174 This directly extends to MACP due to identical 'regular service' definitions.
Further support comes from: Training periods are to be considered as regular service for the purpose of granting MACP benefits. Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3400 In a promotion test context under Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987, the court held: The period of nine months' training undergone by the petitioner shall be included for the purpose of computing total period of service as on the date of notification. And, Period of training including in-service course shall be treated as duty for all purposes. Gadadhar Mohapatra VS Chief Secretary Commissioner, R. P. F. East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar - 2010 Supreme(Ori) 573
Even non-railway analogies align: There is no specific provision which says that the period of training will not be counted as service, especially when the Department had been treating it as in-service training. P. SURESH BABU VS UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES & PENSIONS (DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL & TRAINNG), NEW DELHI - 2016 Supreme(Ker) 228 This led to counting training for IAS promotion eligibility.
Not all training qualifies. Key exceptions:- Pre-appointment Training: Explicitly excluded under MACP Clause 9. Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195Union of India VS Utpal Saikia - 2017 0 Supreme(Gau) 795- Ad-hoc/Temporary Service: Prior regularization doesn't count, but probationary training post-joining does. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174- Probation in New Posts: Continuous service counts post-probation for MACP. Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195
One counter-view rejected a 24-month training claim for MACP, but context suggests it was pre-regularization. H C SHARMAVSM/O RAILWAYS However, prevailing railway precedents favor inclusion for in-service phases.
Additional affirmations: The training period is also considered as service and as such it will be counted for pension... there is no logical reason as to why the said period spent in training should not be counted for the purposes of granting other benefits. JAGDISH RAM VS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND - 2013 Supreme(UK) 332CONS. 88 C. P. LAL BABU SHUKLA VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 Supreme(All) 1231 In police contexts (analogous), training counted for promotional pay-scales, overriding contrary notes. CONS. 88 C. P. LAL BABU SHUKLA VS STATE OF U. P. - 2009 Supreme(All) 1231
Railway Boards have clarified in cases: the period of in service training (imparted soon after recruitment) will have to be counted as ‘Service for all purposes (except for probation). State Of Kerala VS Premavalsalan - 2008 Supreme(Ker) 277
In summary, in-service training in railways typically counts as regular service for MACP, backed by definitions excluding only pre-appointment/ad-hoc phases and affirmed by multiple rulings. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3400
Railway employees should proactively document and claim these benefits. This is general information based on precedents—not personalized legal advice. For tailored guidance, approach CAT or a railway law specialist.
References:1. Union of India VS Bhagaban Mishra - 2017 0 Supreme(Ori) 174: Core ruling on in-service training for ACP/MACP.2. Union of India VS Sh. Om Prakash - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 2195, Union of India VS Utpal Saikia - 2017 0 Supreme(Gau) 795: MACP OM definitions.3. Prasanna Kumar Mishra vs East Coast Railway - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3400: Tribunal on training as regular service.4. Others integrated as cited.
#RailwayMACP, #TrainingPeriod, #MACPBenefits
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that training period is counted towards qualifying service for pension and other purposes w.e.f. 22.12.1983 vide Railway Board's letter No. ... Union of India and others decided on 15.11.2023, Cuttack Bench has decided the controversy ‘whether the training period would be counted for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation. ... No./260/00485/2021 decided on 1511.2023 and held that t....
20 and 30 years of regular service. ... From perusal of order passed by the CAT Cuttack Bench in OA No. 260/00485/2021 East Coast Railway Engineers Association and others (supra), it appears that the Cuttack Bench has decided the controversy ‘whether the training period would be counted for the purpose of grant of financial up-gradation. ... All the applicants were allowed the benefit of MACP counting the ten year service from the d....
Conclusion 7.1 From the above analysis, it is clear that the period spent on training by an employee is counted towards granting MACP benefits. This issue is no more res integra, where the trainees are granted regular grade pay as well as annual increments. ... Analysis 6.1 The issue as to whether the training period is required to be treated as qualifying service for grant of ACP/MACP benefits, w....
As per this letter, the substitutes are allowed all the right and privileges as admissible to temporary Railway employees on completion of four months continuous service from the date of their appointment and TS service shall be counted towards the minimum service of 10, 20 and 30 years for MACP as per ... His regular appointment is shown as 30.11.1983 then also at least 50% of his service from 06.08.1978 till 30.11.1983 was required to be ....
Service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning…” Further, for counting the period of temporary and casual service for the purpose of the said ‘regular service’ for the benefit of MACP has been under question ... It is submitted that the applicant has been granted the benefit of MACP in pursuance to Railway Board’s letter dated 4.12.2....
In view of the clause 9 of Annexure-1 of OM dated May 19, 2008, the regular service of the respondents was counted w.e.f. ... Service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning. ... However, past continuous regular service in another Government Department in a post carrying same grade pay prior to regular appointment in a new Department, without a break, ....
From a plain reading of the above order, it is amply clear that counting of entire temporary status service followed by regularization without break has to be counted for granting the benefit under MACP Scheme in the case of Substitutes and not for casual labourers, in whose case ... The applicant is aggrieved that the respondents have counted his regular service of 13 years w.e.f. 07.07.2009, whereas the same should be counted from the date of Scre....
From a plain reading of the above order, it is amply clear that counting of entire temporary status service followed by regularization without break has to be counted for granting the benefit under MACP Scheme in the case of Substitutes and not for casual labourers, in whose case ... The applicant is aggrieved that the respondents have counted his regular service of 13 years w.e.f. 07.07.2009, whereas the same should be counted from the date of Scre....
Treating of training period as regular service for the purpose of granting ACP/MACP is no more a res integra. This Tribunal held the same view in OA No. 763 of 2014. ... The sole ground on which the prayer of the applicant for grant of MACP has been rejected by the respondents in their letter dated 29.04.2021 is that his regular service for the purpose of MACP is to be counted from the date of Ass....
The short question is whether this period of training of 24 months should be counted as the period spent in service and therefore counted for the purpose of seniority and ACP Scheme. 14. ... this contention of the applicant that training period should be counted for the purpose of MACP, has to be rejected. ... The only issue that remains now is whether the #HL_STAR....
We find that in none of these cases a situation, where a person was sent for training creating a supernumerary post in the cadre of Deputy Collector, after advice by the PSC as done in the case of the petitioner as per Annexure A5, appears to have been considered. Apart from that Annexure A12 shows that the practice hitherto followed was to count the period of training for the 8 years service. There is no specific provision which says that the period of training will not be counted as service, especially when the Department had been treating it as in service training and had been r....
Though this has been stated in the context of pension but as it mentions that the recruits will be considered to have been appointed in the service from the date they undergo training and this training period should also be considered as service period, there is no logical reason as to why the said period spent in training should not be counted for the purposes of granting other benefits. It needs to be mentioned that Clause (ii) of the aforesaid circular only prohibits grant of increment during the training period since during this period they draw a fixed pay but it has a....
In that connection, a reference was made to Railway Board seeking clarification whether the training period shall be counted as service period for the purpose of departmental selection. The petitioner has completed nine years nine months of service as Constable on the date of notification on 30.10.2009 for which he was not eligible to appear in the aforesaid selection test. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner made a representation before the opp.party to permit him to appear in the selection test. In this connection, a reference was made to the Railw....
The training period is also considered as service and as such it will be counted for pension after their confirmation against the substantive and permanent post. Though this has been stated in the context of pension but as it mentions that the recruits will be considered to have been appointed in the service from the date they undergo training and this training period should also be considered as service period, there is no logical reason as to why the said period spent in training should not be counted for the purposes of granting other benefits. A perusa....
Cases of those Drivers whose increments and higher grades were revised in accordance with PHQ letter dated 8-5-2000 (referred 2nd above) will be refixed as ordered above. "In the above circumstances the period of in service training (imparted soon after recruitment) will have to be counted as ‘Service for all purposes (except for probation). The executive order dated 23-4-2004 reads as follows: Therefore it is now clarified that the period of training of directly recruited drivers will be counted for the purpose of increment and higher grade.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
