" IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF AIACEGEO. THIS IS THE ONLY ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERINTENDENTS OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE THROUGH OUT THE COUNTRY . President Mr.T.Dass and SG Mr. Harpal Singh.

Tuesday 1 September 2015

 Sub:- Grant of financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme on promotional hierarchy (instead of Grade Pay hierarchy) – as per judgment of various Courts.

Ref: 1. DOP OM No.35034/3/2008-Estt. (D), dated 19th May, 2009, Reg: Modified  Assured Career Progression Scheme [MACPS]
2. OA No.1038/CH/2010, dated 31.5.2011 – Rajpal Vs UOI. – Referred in para 4 & 5 of CAT Delhi OA No.904/2012, dated 26.11.2012
3. CWP No.19387/2011, dated 19.10.2011 – Rajpal Vs Union of India – in High Court of Punjab & Haryana upholding OA No.1038/CH/2010-Referred in para 6 of CAT Delhi OA No.904/2012, dated 26.11.2012
4. OA No.904/2012, dated 26.11.2012 – Sanjay Kuamr and 18 others Versus Union of India – in CAT Delhi, (Copy attached).
i. The said orders for granting the financial up-gradation under MACPS on Grade Pay hierarchy instead of promotional hierarchy is totally unjust and ultra-vires.
ii. Many courts have held that Financial Upgrading under MACPS should be granted in the promotional grade pay or promotional hierarchy, as per details submitted here below:

Petition No.Applicants & respondentsCourtJudgment
OA No.1038/CH/2010dated 31 .5.2011Rai Pal Versus Union of IndiaCAT ChandigarhHon. CAT Chandigarh allowed the OA No.1038/CH/2010 for grant of financial up-gradation under MA CPS in the promotional hierarchy
CWP No.19387/2011, dated 19.10.2011Raj Pal Versus Union of IndiaHigh Court of Punjab & HaryanaHon. High Court of Punjab Haryana upheld that there was no infirmity in the order passed by CAT Chandigarh oA No.1038/CH/2010.
SLA / TA CC 7467/2013Union of India Versus Raj PalSupreme Court of IndiaHon. Supreme Court Dismissed the Application for Condonation of Delay
OA No.904/2012 dated 26.11.2012Sanjay Kumar and 18 others Versus Union of IndiaCAT DelhiHon. CAT Delhi, allowed the OA, that respondents should give the next higher grade Pay & Pay bandattached to the next promotional post in the hierarchy
iii.Financial up-gradation under ACP Scheme was introduced in the year 1999 and as per the ACP scheme; a Central Govt. / Railway employee with 12 years of regular service in the same grade was eligible for financial up-gradation to the next promotional scale available in the cadre hierarchy. In the same way, the employee was eligible for second financial up-gradation to the next promotional scale available in the cadre hierarchy after the completion of 24 years of regular service.iv. The above ACP Scheme was modified in the year 2008 and named as Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS). MACP Scheme contains provision for grant of three financial up-gradation at the intervals of 10, 20 and 30 years of regular service, and scheme envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher Grade Pay in the hierarchy of the revised pay bands and Grade Pay as per the Revised Pay Rules, 2008.
v. This change over from Promotional Hierarchy to Grade Hierarchy (after Sixth Pay Commission) – was most unjustified, illegal and ultra-vires – as has been held by various Courts vide their judgements cited heretofore.