Decided on September 05,2007

R.K.Puri Respondents


- (1.) CENTRAL Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CAT") while deciding OA No.56/2003 filed by the present respondents directed the petitioner -UOI vide its order dated 29th August, 2003 to give second financial upgradation to them i.e. respondents herein on completion of 24 years of service as per the ACP scheme within three months of the receipt of the order. In the present writ petition the said order has been impugned by the petitioner -UOI.
(2.) RESPONDENT No.1 Shir R.K. Puri was appointed as Stenographer Grade III on 10th March, 1965 and respondent No.2 Shri G.C.Bhatt was appointed as Stenographer Grade III on 10th April, 1964 in the SSB. Subsequently, both the respondents faced the due selection process and they were selected for appointment as Sub -Inspector Stenographer under the provision of CRPF Act and Rules from the civilian cadre to the combative cadre of the SSB. On appointment as Sub -Inspector Stenographer respondent No.1 tendered technical resignation which was accepted by the competent authority. The petitioner also gave them benefit of Article 418 (b) of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 i.e. benefit of their past service for computing pension. Both the respondents were also subjected to medical examination before they were appointed as Sub -Inspector (Steno) in the combative cadre. In their entire career of 30 years they were given only one promotion to the Grade of Inspector (Steno), Therefore they claimed that they were entitled to be upgraded under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (hereinafter referred to as "ACP scheme") for second financial upgradation introduced by the petitioner vide O.M. dated 9th August, 1999. They made representations which were rejected. Hence OA No.56/2003 was filed before the CAT wherein the respondents were granted second financial upgradation under the ACP scheme as they had completed 24 years of service.
(3.) THE impugned order of the CAT is challenged by the UOI with the following submissions: (a) ACP scheme is available only for the benefit of combative post only, whereas the respondents were appointed as Stenographer as a direct recruit and thereafter they were promoted as Sub -Inspector (Steno) and further promoted as Inspector in the combative strength. (b) Respondents have been given two promotions in their career hence they are not entitled to the benefit of ACP scheme which is intended for those who are stagnating for 12 years and for another set of 12 years i.e. 24 years without any financial upgradation or promotion. (c) Since the respondents had two promotions they are not covered under the ACP scheme and Therefore are not entitled for any financial upgradation as claimed. Learned Counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that the appointment of the respondents as Sub Inspector (Steno) was a direct recruitment as they were selected for the said posts and that they received only one promotion during their career of more than 30 years when they were promoted to the rank of Inspector (Steno). He further pointed out that the respondents had joined Stenographer Grade III by way of direct recruitment and could only be promoted in the senior hierarchy as Grade II Stenographer and not as Sub -Inspector (Steno) combative cadre. Learned Counsel for the respondents further submitted that petitioner itself corrected the mistake in the appointment letter of the respondent No.1 issued in the year 1971 and in place of "Promotion" inserted the word "Appointed". Therefore, the respondents have been rightly granted financial upgradation under the ACP scheme by the CAT.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.