Ramesh Rai vs M/o Defence on 6 November 2026

Order

Order pro R. MANISH GARG, MEMBER R. ANAND S KHATI, MEMBER esh Rai, 081), 58 years, Ram Chander Rai, Rani Enclave, r Delhi-81, Cane-weaver as Group ‘C’. : Mr. T.D. Yadav) Versus

of India h Secretary, y of Defence, Block, New Delhi. er in Chief Branch, Head Quarter, ir House, Rajaji Marg, PO-New Delhi. ef Engineer, Delhi Zone, y Engineer Service, antt. ef Engineer, n Command, mandir, Chandigarh. on Engineer, (West), antt-110010. : Mr. Anmol Pandita)

IVE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

r reserved on 23.10.2026 onounced on 06.11.2026 (J) R (A) …Applicant …Respondents

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

HON’BLE DR By virt Administrativ the following “i) to di 09.08.1 complet scale of

(ii) to d 05.04.2 Union of

(iii) to d under M similarly Scale of to the A

(iv) to consequ interest

(v) to p the circu

(vi) Awa

2. Vide or following ob 1900/2024: “M.A. N The pre the app pursuan O.A. No relief, th 14.02.2 the pay consequ

:ORDER:

R. ANAND S KHATI, MEMBER ue of the present O.A. filed ve Tribunals Act, 1985, the a relief(s):- irect the Respondents to grant t 999 in the Pay Scale of Rs. 40 tion of 24 years of service w.e Rs. 5000-8000 to the Applicant. direct the Respondents to gran 010 in OA No. 24.06.2009 in th f India & Ors. to the Applicant direct the Respondents to grant o MACP after completion of 30 ye y situated employee namely Som f Rs.9300-34800/- Grade Pay Rs Applicant. direct the Respondents to re- uential benefits like pay and all on delayed payment of ACP & M pass any other order(s) as may umstances of the case in the inte ard Cost.” rder dated 28.01.2026, pass bservations were made wh No. 1900/2024 esent Miscellaneous Application h plicants (respondents in the O nce of the orders passed by this

o. 1003/2018, wherein the app he respondents have passed Ord 024, refixing the pay of the app y of the applicant has accordin uential benefits have been

R (A): under Section 19 of the applicant has sought for the benefit of 1 ACP w.e.f. 000-6000/- 2ND ACP after e.f. 24.06.2006 in the pay

nt the benefit of order dt. e matter of H.R. Shukla Vs of 3rd financial upgradation ears of regular service like m Chand Sharma in the Pay

s. 4600/-w.e.f. 24.06.2012 fix the pay and grant all owances arrears and 18% MACP. be deem fit and proper in erest of justice. ed by this Tribunal, the hile deciding M.A. No. has been filed on behalf of O.A.) contending that, in s Tribunal in a subsequent plicant had sought similar der No. SPL/01/2024 dated plicant. It is submitted that ngly been re-fixed and all released on 11.03.2024

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

(Annexu the app already infructu Learned submitt grant of with si were gr initial a judgme

Pal Sing No. 183 Patil vs. Learned SPL/01/ correctly the case the res 09.08.1 second 24.06.2 Pay Ban been gr with Gra unjust a pay sca 24.06.2 He furth the issu appointm relates scale of 4200), that the Having respecti Tribuna cannot Howeve record o List the ure R-1). It is, therefore, conten plicant with regard to the gra stands redressed and that the ous and is liable to be disposed o d counsel for the applicant vehe ing that in O.A. No. 1003/2018 f skilled grade from the date of milarly situated Caneweaver/C ranted semi-skilled/skilled grade appointment. A reliance has nts of this Tribunal, including O. 15 (Hari Ram Shukla vs. UO 010 (Abrar Hussain vs. UOI), O gh vs. UOI), O.A. No. 1018/2013 3/2007 (Bansi Lal vs. UOI), and UOI & Ors.). d counsel further submits tha /2024 dated 14.02.2024, the y re-fixed the pay of the applica e of similarly situated employee 009, order dated 05.04.2010). spondents have granted the b 999 in the pay scale of Rs. 4 ACP after completion of 24 006 in the pay scale of Rs. 500 nd-2 Rs. 9300-34800 with Grad anted. Instead, the benefit of thi ade Pay Rs. 2800 has been exte and illegal. It is asserted that the ale of Rs. 9300-34800 with G 006 and that he continues to be her argued that O.A. No. 1003/2 ue of grant of skilled grade ment with consequential benefits to the grant of ACP benefits w. f Rs. 5000-8000 (PB-2 Rs. 9300- along with consequential benef e present M.A. deserves to be rej considered the background of ve pleadings and submissions ad l is of the view that the relief s be granted. Accordingly, M.A. No er, the records of the present M of the O.A. O.A. on 23.02.2026.”

nded that the grievance of ant of ACP/MACP benefits present O.A. has become of accordingly. emently opposes the M.A., , the applicant had sought initial appointment, at par Caneman employees, who es from the date of their been placed on several .A. No. 804/1998, O.A. No. OI), followed in O.A. No. .A. No. 1118/2009 (Prithvi 3 (Man Singh vs. UOI), O.A. O.A. No. 3055/2011 (G.S. at even vide Order No. e respondents have not ant in the manner done in Hari Ram Shukla (O.A. No. It is contended that while benefit of first ACP w.e.f. 4000-6000, the benefit of years of service w.e.f. 00-8000 (corresponding to de Pay Rs. 4200) has not ird MACP w.e.f. 01.09.2008 nded, which is stated to be e applicant is entitled to the rade Pay Rs. 4200 w.e.f. discriminated against. 2018 was restricted only to from the date of initial s, whereas the present O.A. e.f. 24.06.2006 in the pay -34800 with Grade Pay Rs. fits. Hence, it is submitted ected. f the two O.As. and the dvanced by the parties, this sought in the present M.A.

o. 1900/2024 is dismissed. M.A. shall form part of the

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

3. Highlighti applicant sub Weaver/Cane 24.06.1982 promotion d applicant is e MACP Schem instructions.

3.1. Learned Scheme was 09.08.1999, of 12 and 24 claims entitle 6000/- w.e.f. Rs. 5000-800 service.

3.2. Learned similarly situ No. 2416/20 second ACP 8000/-, resp dated 05.04. pay scales a arrears. The Part-II Order ng the facts of the case, l bmits that the applicant was in eman in the Military Enginee and that he has not bee uring his service career. It entitled to financial upgradat mes in accordance with th d counsel for the applicant s introduced vide DoPT Off providing for financial upgrad 4 years of regular service. A ement to the first ACP in the . 09.08.1999 and the second 00/- w.e.f. 24.06.2006, upon c d counsel for the applicant ated employee, namely, H.R 009 before this Tribunal see in the pay scales of Rs. 400 pectively. The said O.A. was 2010, directing the responden as first and second ACP, r said order was implemented r dated 11.10.2010. Learned learned counsel for the nitially appointed as Cane er Services (MES) w.e.f. n granted any regular is contended that the tions under the ACP and e applicable rules and submits that the ACP ice Memorandum dated dations upon completion ccordingly, the applicant e pay scale of Rs. 4000- ACP in the pay scale of completion of 24 years of further submits that a R. Shukla, had filed O.A. eking grant of first and 00-6000/- and Rs. 5000- disposed of vide order nts to grant the aforesaid respectively, along with by the respondents vide counsel for the applicant

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

contends tha applicant des

3.3. Learned respondents upgradation of higher-sk employees. provide for granted the ACP before 0 completion o prescribed co

3.4. Learned issued in Ma whereby the was allegedly Som Chand completed 30 consideration Rs. 4600/-.

3.5. Learned to know of applicant sub of first and at similar benefits have not spite his being similarly situate d counsel for the applicant f issued a letter dated 28.0 of Grade Pay for Master Craf killed posts among Centra According to the applicant consideration of eligible em pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 01.01.2006 for grant of Grade of 30 years of service, subj onditions. counsel for the applicant furt arch 2014 and the fixation o third financial upgradation u y granted to a similarly situ Sharma. The applicant 0 years of service on 24.06.20 n for the third financial upgrad counsel for the applicant sub the aforesaid developments bmitted representations and second ACP and third MACP

t been extended to the ed. further submits that the 05.2010 concerning the ftsmen and restructuring al Government civilian t, the said instructions mployees who had been 5000-8000/- as second e Pay of Rs. 4600/- upon ect to fulfilment of the her relies upon a circular order dated 11.05.2012, under the MACP Scheme ated employee, namely, contends that, having 012, he is also entitled to dation with Grade Pay of bmits that, upon coming in February 2016, the reminders seeking grant P benefits. However, the

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

respondents that denial of similarly situ violative of A

3.6. Learned judgments of vs. Union of Girdhari La contention th admissible be departmental applicant. Ac financial upg and interest,

3.7. Apart fro the applican supporting do that the app initially appoi in the pay sca became entit Scheme w.e. service on 24 5000-8000/- failed to extend the claimed f the aforesaid benefits, despit ated employees, is arbitrary rticles 14 and 16 of the Const d counsel for the applicant f the Hon'ble Supreme Court f India & Ors., reported in 1 al vs. Union of India & hat similarly situated employe enefits extended to others. It l or criminal proceedings a ccordingly, the applicant see gradations, re-fixation of pay as prayed for in the O.A. om the aforesaid oral submiss nt has also filed written s ocuments. In the written sub plicant, who is a visually im inted as Cane Weaver/Canema ale of Rs. 210-290/-. It is sub tled to the first financial upg .f. 09.08.1999 and, upon co 4.06.2006, to the second ACP .

benefits. It is contended te the alleged parity with and discriminatory and itution of India. further relies upon the in K.C. Sharma & Ors. 1998 (1) SLJ SC 54, and Ors., in support of his ees should not be denied is also submitted that no re pending against the ks grant of the claimed y, consequential arrears sions, learned counsel for submissions along with bmissions, it is reiterated mpaired employee, was an in MES on 24.06.1982 bmitted that the applicant gradation under the ACP mpletion of 24 years of P in the pay scale of Rs.

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

3.8. Learned the case of a Shukla, who in MES on 07 submitted tha filing O.A. N financial upg Rs. 4000-600 was allowed v were directed ACP, respect The aforesaid the Chandiga titled Dhann the grant of Canemen.

3.9. It is f 05.04.2010 w Order dated was fixed at scale of Rs. 5 implementati recommenda 9300-34800/ applicant has counsel for the applicant has nother similarly situated emp was also initially appointed as 7.05.1981 in the same pay sca at the said employee had app No. 2416/2009 seeking gra radations under the ACP Sche 00/- and Rs. 5000-8000/-, res vide order dated 05.04.2010, d to grant the aforesaid pay s ively, along with arrears with d decision was based upon th arh Bench of this Tribunal in a Lal & Ors. vs. Union of I f appropriate pay scales to further submitted that the was implemented by the respo 11.10.2010, whereby the pay Rs. 5000/- per month w.e.f 5000-8000/- on grant of secon on of the Sixth Cent tions, his pay was further fix /- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/ s relied upon the said impleme s particularly relied upon ployee, namely, Hari Ram s Cane Weaver/Caneman ale of Rs. 210-290/-. It is proached this Tribunal by nt of first and second eme in the pay scales of spectively. The said O.A. wherein the respondents scales as first and second hin the stipulated period. he judgment rendered by O.A. No. 637/HR/2005, ndia & Ors., concerning similarly situated blind aforesaid order dated ondents by issuing Part-II of Shri Hari Ram Shukla

f. 21.11.2005 in the pay nd ACP. Consequent upon tral Pay Commission xed in Pay Band-2 of Rs. /- w.e.f. 01.01.2006. The entation order to contend

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

that the bene was extended

3.10. Learned subsequent applicant see appointment order dated 1 grant skilled appointment, stipulated pe aforesaid ord order/PTO da

3.11. Drawin 14.02.2024, respondents w.e.f. 09.08. despite exten granted the s 24.06.2006, Shri Hari Ram second finan 01.09.2008 i Rs. 2800/-. A to the benefi fixed in Pay efit of second ACP in the pay d to a similarly situated emplo d counsel for the applicant ha proceedings in O.A. No. 10 eking grant of skilled grade fro as Cane Weaver. The said 17.01.2023, whereby the resp grade to the applicant from , along with all consequent eriod. It is submitted that, der, the respondents issued ated 14.02.2024. ng attention to the said pay learned counsel for the app have granted the benefit of f 1999 in the pay scale of Rs. nding the aforesaid benefit, th second ACP in the pay scale o upon completion of 24 years m Shukla. Instead, the respo ncial upgradation under the n Pay Band-1 of Rs. 5200-20 According to the applicant, the it extended to Shri Hari Ram Band-2 of Rs. 9300-34800/- scale of Rs. 5000-8000/- oyee. as further referred to the 003/2018, filed by the om the date of his initial O.A. was allowed vide pondents were directed to m the date of his initial tial benefits, within the in compliance with the a revised pay fixation y re-fixation order dated plicant submits that the first ACP to the applicant 4000-6000/-. However, he respondents have not of Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. s of service, at par with ndents have granted the e MACP Scheme w.e.f. 0200/- with Grade Pay of e said fixation is contrary Shukla, whose pay was

- with Grade Pay of Rs.

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

4200/- pursu 2416/2009.

3.12. It is, have implem granted the b they have fa scale of Rs. claiming par submits that discrimination Constitution o treatment of placed upon of Uttar Pr reported in ( extension of O.A. No. 24 other admiss

4. Per contra applicant was the pay scale The applicant ACP Scheme 3800-75-440

uant to the order dated 05.04. therefore, contended that al mented the order passed in O benefit of skilled grade and fi ailed to extend the benefit of 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 24.06.200 rity with Shri Hari Ram S such denial of the second n and is violative of Artic of India. In support of the co similarly situated employees the judgment of the Hon'ble radesh & Anr. vs. Arvin (2015) 1 SCC 347. Accordin the benefit of the order date 16/2009, along with consequ ible benefits. , learned counsel for the resp s initially appointed as Cane W e of Rs. 210-4-226-EB-4-250 t was granted the first financi w.e.f. 09.08.1999 in the pa 00/-, vide order dated 24.12.2

.2010 passed in O.A. No. though the respondents O.A. No. 1003/2018 and rst ACP to the applicant, f second ACP in the pay 06, despite the applicant hukla. Learned counsel ACP benefit amounts to les 14 and 16 of the ontention regarding equal s, reliance has also been Supreme Court in State nd Kumar Srivastava, gly, the applicant seeks ed 05.04.2010 passed in uential pay fixation and ondents submits that the Weaver on 24.06.1982 in 0-EB-5-290/- per month. al upgradation under the ay scale of Rs. 2750-70-

001. JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

4.1. Learned applicant was scale of Rs. trade test, v 23.04.2007. 24 years of s trade test by from the da 14.07.2006.

4.2. Learned implementati Commission, (Revised Pay applicant was MACP Schem and the third Pay of Rs. 2 vide order d contend tha upgradations

4.3. Learned applicant had which was d without exam respondents counsel for the respondents s granted the second ACP w.e 3050-75-3950-80-4590/-, up vide Part-II Order dated 23.1 It is contended that, although service on 24.06.2006, he had that date. Consequently, the ate on which he qualified counsel for the respondents on of the recommendations the applicant's pay was r

y) Rules, 2008. It is furth s granted the second financia me w.e.f. 01.09.2008, with G d financial upgradation w.e.f. 400/-. The applicant's pay w dated 20.01.2014. On this at the applicant has been admissible to him under the a counsel for the respondents d earlier filed O.A. No. 1928/2 disposed of at the admission mining the merits of the case to consider his representatio further submits that the .f. 14.07.2006 in the pay pon passing the requisite 0.2006, as amended on h the applicant completed d not passed the requisite second ACP was granted in the trade test, i.e. s submits that, following of the Sixth Central Pay revised under the CCS her submitted that the al upgradation under the rade Pay of Rs. 2000/-, 24.06.2012, with Grade was subsequently revised basis, the respondents granted the financial applicable policy. further submits that the 2017 before this Tribunal, n stage on 31.05.2017, e, with a direction to the n dated 16.07.2016 and

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

pass a reas concerned th O.A. No. 804 with the afo representatio vide letter da

4.4. Learned applicant can benefits purs Dhanna Lal 2416/2009, submitted tha passing the t is distinguish The responde not direct t irrespective o

4.5. Learned applicant is n MACP. It is benefit was Craftsmen wh 5000-8000/- applicant was not fulfil the oned and speaking order. T he grant of skilled grade in te 4/1998 and other connected oresaid direction, the respo on and communicated their d ated 11.01.2018. d counsel for the responde nnot claim parity with the emp suant to the decisions in O & Ors. vs. Union of India H.R. Shukla vs. Union o at the applicant did not fulfil t trade test before the due date able from those of the emplo ents further contend that the he grant of identical benef of the applicable eligibility cond counsel for the respondents not entitled to Grade Pay of Rs contended that, under the r available to eligible highly ho had been granted the pre- as the second ACP before s granted the second ACP w.e aforesaid condition. The res

The said representation erms of orders passed in matters. In compliance ondents considered the decision to the applicant ents contends that the loyees who were granted O.A. No. 637/HR/2005, a & Ors., and O.A. No. of India & Ors. It is the requisite condition of e and, therefore, his case yees relied upon by him. e aforesaid decisions did fits to every employee ditions. further submits that the

s. 4600/- under the third elevant instructions, the y skilled workers/Master -revised pay scale of Rs. 01.01.2006. Since the e.f. 14.07.2006, he does spondents further submit

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

that the appl workers/Mast

4.6. Learned discrimination financial upg to him under the applicant related relief with clean ha the present O

5. Heard lear documents an

6. We have c learned coun pleadings, do The controve around the a scale of Rs. situated emp grant of Gr upgradation.

7. At the o appointed a respondents icant does not belong to the c ter Craftsmen eligible for the c counsel for the respondents n and submits that the applic radations and corresponding r the ACP/MACP Schemes. It i has not disclosed the filing of fs and has, therefore, not a ands. On these grounds, the O.A. is devoid of merit and is li rned counsel for the parties an nd written submissions availab carefully considered the rival s nsel for the parties and have ocuments and written submis ersy involved in the present applicant's claim for grant of 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 24.06.20 ployee Shri Hari Ram Shukla, rade Pay of Rs. 4600/- un utset, it is noticed that the as Cane Weaver/Caneman have not disputed the applica category of highly skilled claimed benefit. denies the allegation of cant has been granted all pay benefits admissible is further contended that f the earlier O.A. seeking approached this Tribunal respondents submit that iable to be dismissed. nd perused the pleadings, ble on record. submissions advanced by e also gone through the ssions placed on record. O.A. primarily revolves f second ACP in the pay 06, at par with similarly and his further claim for nder the third financial e applicant was initially on 24.06.1982. The ant's length of service. It

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

is also evid 14.02.2024 t pay scale of applicant. consideration pay scale o consequentia

8. The applic 05.04.2010 p H.R. Shukla implementati implementati granted the s 21.11.2005 a Rs. 9300-348 However, me another emp automatically relevant elig established to

9. In the pres the grant of t the requisite of service on trade test by dent from the revised pay that the benefit of first ACP w Rs. 4000-6000/- has alread Therefore, the principal n is with regard to the denial o of Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. l claim for higher Grade Pay u cant has primarily based his c passed by this Tribunal in O.A a vs. Union of India & Ors on order dated 11.10.201 on order reveals that Shri second ACP in the pay scale o and his pay was subsequently 800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4 erely because a particular bene loyee pursuant to a judicial or y entitle the applicant to an id gibility conditions and servi o be identical. sent case, the specific stand o the second ACP to the applican trade test. Although the appli n 24.06.2006, he had not q y that date. Accordingly, the r y fixation order dated w.e.f. 09.08.1999 in the y been extended to the grievance requiring of the second ACP in the 24.06.2006 and the under the MACP Scheme. claim on the order dated A. No. 2416/2009, titled s., and the consequential

10. A perusal of the Hari Ram Shukla was of Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. y fixed in Pay Band-2 of 200/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006. efit has been extended to rder, the same would not entical benefit unless the ce particulars are also of the respondents is that nt was subject to passing icant completed 24 years qualified in the requisite respondents granted him

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

the second qualified in t able to esta requirement that he had absence of s second ACP ground of par

10. We have order dated of the said or the grant of initial appoin benefits. The claimed in th right upon th Rs. 5000-800 conditions go re-fixation or aforesaid ord directions act

11. As regard 4600/- under contended th such benefit

ACP w.e.f. 14.07.2006, i.e. the requisite trade test. The blish from the material plac of passing the trade test was fulfilled the said condition such material, the applicant's from 24.06.2006 cannot be rity with Shri Hari Ram Shukla e also considered the applic 17.01.2023 passed in O.A. N rder indicates that the controv skilled grade to the applica ntment as Cane Weaver, a e said order was passed in t at O.A. and does not, by itsel e applicant to claim the secon 00/- w.e.f. 24.06.2006, irres overning the grant of such ben rder dated 14.02.2024, issued der, has also to be examine tually issued in O.A. No. 1003/ ds the applicant's claim for g r the third financial upgradatio hat the relevant instructions d to eligible highly skilled wo the date on which he applicant has not been ced on record that the not applicable to him or on 24.06.2006. In the s claim for grant of the accepted merely on the a. cant's reliance upon the

o. 1003/2018. A perusal versy therein pertained to nt from the date of his long with consequential the context of the relief lf, confer an independent nd ACP in the pay scale of spective of the eligibility nefit. The subsequent pay d in compliance with the ed in the context of the /2018. rant of Grade Pay of Rs. on, the respondents have dated 28.05.2010 extend orkers/Master Craftsmen

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

who had bee 8000/- as se the prescribe granted the s cut-off date. establish th prescribed u conditions ha Grade Pay of is also not su

12. The appl Sharma, cont with Grade P applicant has situated in a conditions go both cases. I invoked to c instructions. demonstrable conditions.

13. The relia Hon'ble Supr Arvind Kum also been co en granted the pre-revised cond ACP prior to 01.01.2006 ed conditions. In the present second ACP w.e.f. 14.07.2006 The applicant has not placed a at he satisfies the specif under the aforesaid instruct ave been relaxed in his favour f Rs. 4600/- on the basis of t stainable. icant has further relied upon tending that the benefit of th Pay of Rs. 4600/- was extend s not established that the said all material respects or that overning the grant of such b t is well settled that the princi claim a benefit contrary to A claim based on parity m e similarity in the relevan nce placed by the applicant u reme Court in State of Utta mar Srivastava, reported in nsidered. The said judgment pay scale of Rs. 5000- 6, subject to fulfilment of case, the applicant was 6, i.e. after the aforesaid any material on record to fic eligibility conditions tions or that the said

r. Therefore, his claim for the aforesaid instructions the case of Som Chand hird financial upgradation ed to him. However, the d employee was similarly t the relevant eligibility benefit were identical in iple of equality cannot be the applicable rules or must be supported by a nt facts and eligibility upon the judgment of the ar Pradesh & Anr. vs. (2015) 1 SCC 347, has recognises the principle

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

that similarly benefit of a j therein. How requirement similarly situ eligibility con establish suc by the respo cut-off date f

14. We also already unde dated 14.02. No. 1003/20 09.08.1999. benefits, how material est applicable AC

15. In view o has failed to scale of Rs. 5 4600/- unde present O.A. payment of survive.

y situated persons may ordin judicial decision, subject to th wever, the said principle does of establishing that the pe ated in all material respects ditions. In the present case, t ch entitlement in view of the ondents regarding the trade for the claimed higher Grade P o take note of the fact that ertaken re-fixation of the ap 2024 in compliance with the 18 and have extended the b The applicant's grievance r wever, cannot be accepted in ablishing his entitlement to CP/MACP instructions. of the foregoing discussion, w establish his entitlement to th 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 24.06.200 r the third financial upgrada . Consequently, the prayer consequential arrears and narily be entitled to the he exceptions recognised s not dispense with the erson claiming parity is and fulfils the applicable he applicant has failed to specific objection raised test and the prescribed Pay. t the respondents have pplicant's pay vide order directions issued in O.A. enefit of first ACP w.e.f. regarding the remaining the absence of sufficient o the same under the we find that the applicant he second ACP in the pay 06 or to Grade Pay of Rs. ation, as claimed in the for re-fixation of pay, interest also does not

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE

Item no.62 (C-4)

16. According and is hereby

17. Pending M

(Dr. Anand S Member (

/jk/

gly, the present O.A. is foun y dismissed. There shall be no M.A(s), if any, shall also stand S Khati)

(A)

OA No.2004/20 nd to be devoid of merit order as to costs. d disposed of. (Manish Garg) Member (J)

JUGAL KISHORE 2026.11.06 16:23:33+05'30' JUGAL KISHORE