SHRI CHINGTHAM NANDA KUMAR SINGH vs M/O FINANCE, D/O REVENUE on 29 September 2026

ORDER

PER R.S. DOGRA, MEMBER (J):

The instant OA has been filed by the applicant praying for the following relief(s):- “8.1 That the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the applicant 1st financial upgradation under MACP scheme in PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800 with GP Rs.4800/- with effect from 31.12.2020 and to re-fix pay of the applicant with arrear monetary benefits. 8.3 Costs of the application. 8.4 Any other relief(s) to which the applicants are entitled as the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant is serving as Inspector of Central Goods and Service Tax and posted at office of the Commissioner, CGST, Guwahati. By this Original Application, he is praying for a direction upon the respondents for grant of 1st financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the GP of Rs. 4800/- w.e.f. 31.12.2020 with arrear monetary benefits. The applicant was initially appointed as Inspector of Post under the Ministry of Communication, Department of Post on 31.12.2010 and posted at Vadodara West Division, Gujarat. While working as Inspector of Posts, the applicant had applied through proper channel for selection/appointment for the Post of Inspector in Central Excise under the Ministry of Finance,

SOURABH KUMAR

Department of Revenue. The applicant was appointed and posted as Inspector of Central Excise at Cochin in the State of Kerala. The applicant has completed 10 years of regular services as on 31.12.2020 but till date, he has not been granted the 1st financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-. The applicant has submitted representations on 16.06.2023, 15.09.2023, 07.12.2023, 17.12.2023, 08.01.2024 to the Chief Commissioner, CGST and Customs, Guwahati Zone against withholding of his 1st MACP upgradation in the GP Rs. 4800/- w.e.f 31.12.2020 but yielded no result. The applicant is serving as Inspector of Central Goods and Service Tax and posted at office of the Commissioner, CGST, Guwahati. By this Original Application he is praying for a direction upon the respondent for grant of 1st financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the GP of Rs. 4800/- w.e.f 31.12.2020 with arrear monetary benefits. Hence this OA.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has reiterated the averments made in written statement and submitted that he had submitted his Technical Resignation on 03.09.2012 referred by him as Annexure-A/2. However, as per Service

SOURABH KUMAR

Book records of erstwhile Department of Posts which was received by this Department at the time of joining of the said Applicant in this Department, it appears that the Assistant Director Postal Service (S&V) had accepted the 'Technical Resignation' of the applicant and relieved him from the said Department on 07.09.2012(A/N) vide memo No. STA/44-3/l dated 03.09.2012. Subsequently, he was appointed as Inspector of Central Excise in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin-I vide order No.144/2012 dated 17.09.2012. Based on the said Order, he had joined on 17.09.2012 in Hqrs. Office, Central Excise, Cochin-I. The joining date mentioned by the Applicant in said OA is 31.12.2012 instead of 17.09.2012 which is wrong and not admitted. But considering the eligibility aspect for grant of first financial upgradation under MACP scheme, the same is not correct as erstwhile Department of Posts, Government of India had granted the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- w.e.f. 01.01.2011 vide OM No. 2-12/2013—PCC dated 24.10.2017 issued by Assistant Director General (GDS/PCC), Department of Posts, Ministry of Communication, Government of India. It is a fact that Department of Posts had granted the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to those Inspectors who have joined in the grade

SOURABH KUMAR

pay of Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 vide OM No. 2-1212013- PCC dated 24.10.2017 and the benefit of the same was granted to Applicant also. The arrear payment towards up-gradation of Grade Pay from Rs. 4200/- to Rs. 4600/- was also granted to applicant w.e.f 01.01.2011 and the same has been recorded in his Service Book. It is also pertinent to mention that the Applicant was not free from the vigilance angle to consider his case for granting of 1st financial up-gradation as vigilance case was initiated by the Competent Authority for participating in the destruction of Areca Nut from 31.10.2020 to 01.11.2020 by him without any written order of the Competent Authority while he was posted in Land Customs Station, Darranga prior to issuance of suspension order to him. After enquiry of the case, the Applicant was placed under suspension w.e.f. 25.03.2021 vide Order No. 33/CIU-VIG/GHY/12027 dated 25.03.2021 under Sub-Rule (1)(a) of Rule 10 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965. The suspension was extended for another 180 days vide Order No. 67ICIU-VIG/GHY/2021 dated 18.06.2021 issued on 28.06.2021. Aggrieved by the said order, the Applicant approached this Tribunal and filed an O.A. No. 161/2021. This Tribunal vide its order dated 09.01.2023 passed in O.A. No.

SOURABH KUMAR

161/2021 had quashed and set aside the extension of suspension order dated 18.06.2021 as well as subsequent orders of extension of suspension dated 03.09.2021, 06.12.2021, 01.03.2022, 25.05.2022, 12.08.2022 & 09.11.2022. White pronouncing the said judgement, this Tribunal had not interfered with the original suspension order dated 25.03.2021. Subsequent to vigilance proceedings against the Applicant, Charge Memorandum was issued on 09.07.2024 by the Disciplinary Authority. Thus, it is apparent from the foregoing para that he was never free from vigilance angle as this Tribunal has not revoked the suspension order dated 25.03.2021 on earlier occasion. Therefore, his representations are kept in abeyance till the outcome of final order of Disciplinary Authority.

Counsel also states that the averment made by the Applicant that the MACP scheme was operational w.e.f. 01.09.2009 is wrong and not acceptable as Para 9 of DoP&T's OM No. 35034/3/2008- Estt.(D) dated 19.05.2009 clearly states that the scheme would be operational w.e.f. 01.09.2008. It is further submitted that the Applicant had filed another O.A. 99 of 2019 before this Tribunal to set aside and quash the

SOURABH KUMAR

impugned Circular No. A-22015/117/2016-Ad.IIIA dated 20.09.2018 issued by the Board (CBIC). However, it is vehemently submitted that the said Board’s Circular dated 20.09.2018 was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SK Nausad Rahaman & Ors. versus Union of India vide Judgment dated 10.03.2022. Therefore, no question/objection on validity and consequent action thereof on Board's Circular dated 20.09.2018 can be raised by the applicants/Inspectors who have been transferred by Inter-Commissionerate Transfer (ICT). It is further to be noted that after upholding the validity of the Board's Circular dated 20.09.2018 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by going through detailed discussion on all related issues (ICT issues), there is no illegality in taking further action in accordance with the cited Board's Circular. It is pertinent to state that, the said O.A. No. 99 of 2019 has since now been disposed of by this Tribunal vide its Order dated 26.06.2024. That it is further submitted that, the Board, vide Circular dated 20.09.2018, had stated that Recruitment Rules of Inspector, 2016 do not have any provision for recruitment by absorption and accordingly, no ICT application can be considered after coming into force of the Recruitment Rules, 2016 and it was clarified that an office order for Inter

SOURABH KUMAR

Commissionerate Transfer in the Grade of Inspectors issued on or after 26.12.2016 (i.e. from the date of enactment of RR, 2016) will be non-est and accordingly, any officer who has joined another zone in pursuance of such order shall be treated as a deemed case on loan basis w.e.f. 26.12.2016. These officers shall be on deemed loan till 31.03.2019, on which date the officers shall stand relieved and be reverted to their parent Zones. Thereafter, the Applicant has been relieved of his duty w.e.f. 11.07.2024 with a direction to report to his parent zone i.e. Thiruvananthapuram and accordingly his service book has also been sent to the Additional Commissioner, office of the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Cochin, 682018 (Kerala). In view of the subsequent events, prima facie it appears that, the instant O.A. is not maintainable in its present form inasmuch as this Tribunal does not have the territorial jurisdiction over the Applicant as on this day and therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed being without jurisdiction.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that date of joining of the applicant as ‘Inspector’ of Central Excise in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 is 17.09.2012 instead of

SOURABH KUMAR

31.12.2012. Due to oversight, it was wrongly entered as 31.12.2012 instead of 17.09.2012. It is stated that as per DoPT's OM No. l669022409144 dated 21st November, 2022, 'Regular Service' for the purpose of the MACPS shall commence from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade on a regular basis either on direct recruitment basis or on absorption/re-employment basis. Service rendered on casual, adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre- appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning. However, past continuous regular service in same/another Central Government Department in a post carrying same Pay Level in the Pay Matrix prior to regular appointment in a new Department, without a break, shall also be counted towards qualifying regular service for the purpose of MACPS only (and not for the regular promotions). However, benefits under the MACPS in such cases shall not be considered till satisfactory completion of the probation period in the new post. As such, 'Regular Service' for the purpose of grant of financial benefit to the applicant under the MACPS shall commence from the date of his joining in the Department of Post i.e. 31.12.2010 not from 01.01.2011 as claimed by the respondents. Since the applicant had joined the Department of Post on 31.12.2010

SOURABH KUMAR

(Α/N) not on 01.01.2006, the first financial upgradation to the applicant under the MACP was due on 31.12.2020. It is pertinent to mention here that on the date of eligibility of the applicant for grant of first financial upgradation under MACP Scheme w.e.f 31.12.2020, he was neither under suspension nor charge sheet was issued to him. Counsel states that it is a settled position of law that mere pending vigilance case against any officer cannot be a bar for promotion. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Etc. -Vs- K.V. Jankiraman Exc. has held that the promotion etc. cannot be withheld merely because some disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against the employee. Even, the applicant was free from vigilance angle when he became entitled for grant of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme. Therefore, under the present facts and circumstances, the original application is liable to be allowed.

5. Heard the parties and perused the materials on records.

6. It is an admitted position that on the date of his eligibility for grant of 1st Financial Upgradation on 31.12.2020,

SOURABH KUMAR

no such disciplinary proceedings, Charge-Sheet or Supension was pending against the applicant. Therefore, the applicant is ought to be considered for grant of benefit of 1st financial upgradation from the date of his eligibility as per his entitlement. However, respondents’ contention that the applicant was not granted benefit of financial upgradation owing to the fact that he was never free from vigilance angle, is not sustainable as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India etc. Vs. K.V. Jankiraman on 27.08.1991 had clearly held that: “The conclusion No. 1 should be read to mean that the promotion etc. cannot be withheld merely because some disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against the employee. To deny the said benefit, they must be at the relevant time pending the stage when charge- memo/charge-sheet has already been issued to the employee.” It is also noted that the applicant’s case is also buttressed by Judgement dated 17.12.2013 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 94/2013 dealing with the issue of MACP, whereby this Tribunal had observed as follows: “On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant referred to a Circular dated 18.10.2010 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Communication & IT, Department of Posts (Pay Commission Cell) regarding clarifications with regard to delay and irregularities in implementation of modified assured career progression scheme. He quoted last three lines of the clarification at Sl. No. 5, which reads as under:-

SOURABH KUMAR

“Similarly, the officials, who were facing disciplinary action as on the date of actual due date of their upgradation can only be not considered. Therefore, he submitted that as per this clarification, the applicant is entitled for MACP from 01.09.2008, the date on which he became eligible because on that date, there was no disciplinary case pending against him or no charge sheet was issued to him as on that date.” Applying the aforesaid ratio and taking into account the entire conspectus of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to get the benefit of 1st MACP from the date of his eligibility i.e. w.e.f. 31.12.2020. Therefore, the respondents are directed to grant the benefit of 1st financial upgradation under MACP scheme with Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- with effect from 31.12.2020 to the applicant and to re-fix his pay with arrear monetary benefits. Consequential benefits, if any, may also be granted to the applicant.

7. For the foregoing discussions, the instant OA stands allowed. Pending M.A.(s), if any, also stand disposed of. No costs.

(MALLIKA ARYA) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

/SK/

SOURABH KUMAR