SATENDRA PAL vs NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY on 5 November 2026

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial) Mr. Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and Mr. Amitabh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed on 12.08.2013 to the post of Assistant Printing Press under the Chief Depot Material Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Varanasi Division. He has filed the present Original Application seeking grant of the first financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme, which became due on 12.08.2023, along with consequential arrears. The applicant’s claim is that his financial upgradation was withheld on the basis of entries recorded in his Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs), particularly the remark “Employees Work Slowly” recorded for the year 2022-

23. He has also challenged the assessment and grading of his APARs for the years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 and has submitted several representations to the competent authorities seeking correction of the entries and grant of the benefit of MACP. However, no final decision has been communicated to him on his representations.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant became entitled to the first financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme on completion of 10 years of regular service on 12.08.2023, however, the respondents have illegally withheld the same on the basis of incorrect and arbitrary entries recorded in his APARs. He further submitted that the remark “Employees Work Slowly” recorded in the APAR for the year 2022-23 was neither justified nor preceded by any communication or opportunity to submit a representation. He also submitted that the applicant's APAR gradings for the preceding years were not properly assessed against the prescribed benchmark and that the respondents failed to consider his representations dated 04.08.2023, 04.12.2023, 14.02.2024 and 27.06.2024. Despite submitting representations through the prescribed channels, no decision has been taken by the competent authority. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed that the respondents be directed to correct the irregularities in the APARs, consider the applicant’s case afresh and grant him the first financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme with effect from 12.08.2023, along with consequential arrears.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the APAR entries for the relevant years were communicated to the applicant through the HRMS portal and that, as per the prescribed procedure, any representation against such entries was required to be submitted online within 15 days. However, the applicant failed to submit any representation within the stipulated period. He further submitted that the applicant's case for financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme is required to be considered in accordance with the applicable rules and instructions.

5. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider and decide his pending representations within a stipulated period of time.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present Original Application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the applicant’s representations dated 04.08.2023, 04.12.2023, 14.02.2024 and 27.06.2024, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

7. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(Manju Pandey)

(Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (A)

Member (J)

/Shakuntala/