SMT SUSHAMA DASS vs D/o Postal on 31 December 2019

O R D E R

By Ramesh Singh Thakur, JM:-

This Original Application has been filed by the applicant for deciding the representation of the applicant dated 07.12.2010 (Annexure A-1).

Sub: MACP

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant had been posted on the post of Postal Assistant on 06.04.1977. After completion of 16 years of service he was granted Time Bound Promotion (in short TBOP) by the respondents as per rules on 06.04.1993 in the next pay scale of Rs. 4500-125-7000. After completion of 26 years of service he had been given the B.C.R. promotion in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-150-8000 from 01.07.2003.

3. As per the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commission, the respondent No. 1 passed the orders for granting the promotion to the employees of the Department completing the service period of 10, 20 & 30 years from the date of recruitment/appointment, first M.A.C.P. after 10 years service, second M.A.C.P. after 20 years service and third M.A.C.P. after 30 years of service in the department with effective from the date 01.09.2008.

4. The applicant after having completed the 30 years of the applicant on 06.04.2007 there had not been issued the orders for promotion in IIIrd MACP by the respondents. The applicant submits that the juniors have been given IIIrd MACP and as per the seniority list, the name of the applicant is at Serial No. 25, while by the respondents there had been posted/promoted the employees of Sr. No. 26,27,28,29,30,31,32 etc. in the new pay scale of Rs. 6500- Sub: MACP

200-10500 (in VI pay commission Rs. 9300-34300 with grade pay) on IIIrd MACP (Annexure A-2)

5. The applicant have submitted representation/appeal on 25.11.2010 to the respondent No.3 and prayed that, on dated 01.09.2008 there was not any departmental proceedings on the applicant. The representation/appeal of the applicant is also pending till today. Copy of the representation/appeal is enclosed as Annexure A-1.

6. The main grounds for challenge in this Original Application is that being entitled for promotion/upgradation of IIIrd MACP in the scale of Rs. 9300-34500-PB+4600 GP, the juniors had been granted the benefits of IIIrd MACP, which is totally illegal on the part of the respondents.

7. The respondents have filed their reply. In the preliminary submissions they submitted that as per recommendation of sixth pay commission, there are three financial up-gradation granted to employees after completion of 10, 20 & 30 years of service. The applicant was due for 3rd financial upgradation on 01.09.2008. The meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee was held on 22.07.2010 for granting financial up gradation to the eligible candidates on completion of service of 10,20 & 30 years. The name of the applicant was also taken into consideration for Sub: MACP

granting IIIrd financial up gradation, but after assessment of service records of the applicant, the committee came to a conclusion that the applicant is subject to punishment till 30.09.2011. Therefore, he was not recommended for grating 3rd financial upgradation by the committee.

8. In para-wise reply it was further submitted by the replying respondents that the applicant was not found fit by the Departmental Promotion Committee for granting promotion, as the applicant was subject to punishment that time. A copy of the minutes of the screening committee held on 22.07.2010 is annexed as Annexure R-1. The other juniors as shown in Annexure A-2 promoted in the next higher grade, were found eligible by the DPC, but not a single junior employee is promoted in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-200-10500 on third MACP. The representation of the applicant was also rejected on the ground that the applicant was not considered fit for promotion by the committee as the applicant was under punishment that time. A copy of the order dated 11.02.2011 is annexed as Annexure R-2.

9. The applicant has submitted his rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents. In rejoinder it is submitted by the applicant that on 06.04.2007 there had been attained MACP-III to the applicant. It is well established law that, when there is being due on which Sub: MACP

date the promotion/up gradation of the employee, from that there should be observed the C.R. for previous 5 years of the applicant. It is further submitted by the applicant that the applicant was due for MACP-III on 01.09.2008 and the respondents should have observed the C.R. of the applicant 5 years back from dated 06.04.2007. The respondents having held/convened the meeting of screening committee on 27.10.2010, they had been observed the C.R. before 27.10.2010 which is legally not valid. The applicant further submitted that the respondents should have observed the C.R. of year 2002,2003,2004,2005 & 2006 of the applicant. During this period the applicant was not under any punishment except in the year 2006, one increment for three month, with effect from 01.04.2007. The respondents have not anywhere mentioned this in his reply that for which year to year the screening committee had observed the C.R.

10. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents annexed therewith.

11. From the pleadings it is admitted fact that the applicant was posted on the post of Postal Assistant on 06.04.1977 and after completion of 16 years of service he was granted Time Bound Promotion (in short TBOP) by the respondents as per rules on 06.04.1993. After completion of 26 years of service he had been Sub: MACP

given the B.C.R. promotion in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-150-8000 from 01.07.2003.

12. The contention of the applicant is that as per recommendation of Sixth Pay Commission, the respondent No. 1 passed the orders for granting the promotion to the employees of the Department completing the service period of 10, 20 & 30 years from the date of recruitment/appointment, first M.A.C.P. after 10 years service, second M.A.C.P. after 20 years service and third M.A.C.P. after 30 years of service in the department with effective from the date 01.09.2008. The main contention of the applicant is that the applicant has completed 30 years of the service on 06.04.2007 and had not been issued the orders for promotion in IIIrd MACP by the respondents. The juniors of the applicant has been given IIIrd MACP and as per the seniority list, the name of the applicant is at Serial No. 25, while by the respondents there had been posted/promoted the employees of Sr. No. 26,27,28,29,30,31,32 etc. in the new pay scale of Rs. 6500-200- 10500 (in VI pay commission Rs. 9300-34300 with grade pay) on IIIrd MACP (Annexure A-2). Despite the representation/appeal on 25.11.2010 there was no order for that. A copy of representation is annexed as Annexure A-1.

Sub: MACP

13. On the other side, the contention of the respondents is that the applicant was due for 3rd financial upgradation on 01.09.2008. The meeting of the DPC was held on 22.07.2010 for granting financial up gradation to the eligible candidates on completion of service of 10,20 & 30 years. The name of the applicant was also taken into consideration for granting IIIrd financial up gradation, but after assessment of service records of the applicant, the committee came to a conclusion that the applicant is subject to punishment till 30.09.2011. Therefore, he was not recommended for grating 3rd financial upgradation by the committee.

14. Although the applicant in the rejoinder has submitted that on 06.04.2007 the 3rd MACP should have been granted, said submission of the applicant could not be accepted on the ground that MACP has came into force on 01.09.2008. As per reply of the respondents it is clear that the applicant was subject to punishment till 30.09.2011. So there is no question for entitlement of 3rd MACP to the applicant. Though the respondent department has considered the case of the applicant for 3rd MACP with effect from 01.09.2008, but the Departmental Screening committee did not find the applicant suitable and the name of the applicant was not recommended for 3rd financial up-gradation. As per additional reply the respondents have placed on record Annexure R/3 to Sub: MACP

Annexure R-6. But these punishments are after 01.09.2008. So it has no impact on the consideration of applicant for 3rd MACP on completion of 30 years.

15. Admittedly the applicant was appointed as postal assistant on 06.04.1977 and the applicant has completed the 30 years on 06.04.2007. On that date the applicant was eligible for 3rd MACP. As the MACP has came into existence with effect from 01.09.2008 so the applicant is entitled for 3rd MACP with effect from 01.09.2008. It is necessary to implicate that the punishment orders are in the year 16.06.2014 and 30.01.2016. Moreover, in the impugned order the respondents have indicated the reasons to the fact that the applicant was on punishment till 30.09.2011 and the DPC was held in the year 22.07.2010. So the reasons given by the respondent department is vague and illegal.

16. In view of the above, the Original Application is allowed and the respondents are directed to promote/upgrade the applicant for 3rd MACP with effect from 01.09.2008, if otherwise found suitable.

17. The said exercise be done within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(Ramesh Singh Thakur) (Navin Tandon) Judicial Member Administrative Member rn