V E CHANDRAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first applicant is a Sepoy working in the Special Customs Preventive Divisional Office, Kozhikode who has completed 24 years of service and the second applicant is the Kerala Central Excise and Customs Group D Officers Association, Cochin and Kozhikode Commissionerates representated by its General Secretary. THEir grievance is that the second financial upgradation in terms of the Assured Career Progression Scheme for the Central Government civilian employees (A1) to the scale of pay of Rs. 3050-75-3950-80-4590 (LDC scale) as is implemented by order dated 23.8.1999 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (A2) is being denied to the Sepoys who have completed 24 years of service on the ground that hey do not possess SSLC/MatricuIation qualification which is prescribed for the post of Lower Division Clerks. THE allegations in the application are briefly stated as follows:

(2.) The first applicant who has not passed SSLC examination joined the Central Excise Department as Sepoy in Group D on 24.5.1975. As per Annexure A1 scheme Group D employees on completion of 12 and 24 years of service are entitled to the first and second financial upgradations on the basis of seniority cum fitness without reference to educational qualification as by such financial upgradation the employees continue to perform the same duties which they had been performing and priviledges related to higher status such as invitation to ceremonial functions, deputation to higher posts etc., would not be available to them. As per the order dated 23.8.99 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (A2), the second financial upgradation due to the Sepoys in the Central Excise and Customs Department is to the pay scale of L.D.C. Rs. 3050-75-3950-80-4590. All the Sepoys, who completed twelve years of service got the first financial upgradation. Though the first applicant completed 24 years of service in May 1999 he was not given the second financial upgradation for the reason that he did not possess the educational qualification of SSLC. The Sepoys of Central Excise/Customs, Patna, Bangalore, Delhi and Calcutta Commi-ssionerates who have competed 24 years of service have been granted the second financial upgradation without insisting on the educational qualification. In reply to the representation of the first applicant claiming the second financial upgradation he was served with the Annexure A8 order of the 4th respondent stating that he did not a have the educational qualification of SSLC and therefore he was not eligible to get the second financial upgradation. Though the second applicant raised the issue in the J.C.M. there was no favourable decision. In reply to the representation made by the second respondent in this regard the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue issued the order dated 12th February, 2001 (Annexure A11) stating that Sepoys and Havildars who do not possess educational qualification of SSLC /Matriculation which is the recruitment qualification for the post of LDC cannot be granted the second financial upgradation. The first respondent thereafter issued O.M. No. 35034/2/2001 Estt(D) dated 1.6.2001 (Annexure A12) providing that Group D employees on completion of 24 years of service would be allowed second financial upgradation atleast to the pay scale of Rs.2750-4400 and that Group D employees who are Matriculates will be eligible to the second financial upgradation to the scale Rs. 3050-4590. This classification of Group D employees as Matriculates and non-Matriculates for the purpose of denying the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590 to non-Matriculates is arbitrary, irrational and opposed to the spirit behind the Assured Career Progression scheme. By Annexure A 12 denying second financial upgradation to non-Matriculate Sepoys, who have served for 12 years a right vested in them under Annexure A1 scheme is sought to be taken away which is not permissible. With these allegations, the applicants pray that impugned orders A8, A11 and A12 may be set aside declaring that Group D employees who have completed 24 years of service and found fit for promotion are eligible for second financial upgradation irrespective of their educational qualification and the respondents be directed to grant the second financial upgradation to the applicants with consequential benefits.

(3.) WE have carefully gone through all the material on record and have heard at length the arguments of Mr. C.S.G. Nair, the learned Counsel of the applicant and Mr. C. Rajendran, the Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. That as per the order dated 23.8.99 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance Department of Expenditure (A2) second financial upgradation in the cadre of Sepoys is to the pay scale of UDC Rs. 3050-4590 is not disputed and is evident from Annexure A2. However this financial upgradation is being denied to the first applicant and other members of the second applicant association solely for the reason that they do not possess the educational qualification of Matriculation or equivalent which is the prescribed qualification for recruitment as L.D.C. Learned Counsel of the applicant argued that financial upgradation not being a promotion as even on such upgradation the employee would be discharging the same duties of a Group D employee without enjoying the status of the higher post, the insistenceon possession of educational qualification for financial upgradation is the result of an erroneous interpretation of condition No. 6 of the Annexure A1. He further argued that this action of the respondents based on the erroneous interpretation defeats the purpose of the scheme, which is to provide a safety net to deal with the problem of genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the employees due to lack of adequate promotional avenues. WE find considerable force in this argument of the learned Counsel. In all the three impugned orders A8, A11 and A12 the ground for denying the claim of the applicants for second financial upgradation is that Group D officials who do not possess the educational qualification (SSLC) prescribed for recruitment to L.D.C. do not qualify for the second financial upgradation in view of condition No. 6 in Annexure A1 to the Assured Career Progression Scheme. The paragraph No. 6 regarding conditions for grant of benefits under the ACP scheme reads as follows: