Rajagopal p t vs EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

-1-
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application No.180/00493/2025
th
Friday this the 16 day of October 2026
C O R A M :
HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Ms.V.RAMA MATHEW, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Rajagopal.P.T.,
Aged 60 years,
S/o.Gopalakrishnan.K.,
Retired Superintendent,
Passport Office, Kozhikode.
Residing at Sopanam, V.K.K.Menon Road,
Kallai P.O., Calicut – 673 003. ...Applicant
(By Advocates Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy & Mrs.Kala.T.Gopi)
v e r s u s
1. Union of India
represented by the Secretary to the Government of India,
Ministry of External Affairs, South Block,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2. The Joint Secretary (CPV) & Chief Passport Officer,
PSP Division, Ministry of External Affairs,
Patiala House Annexe, Tilak Marg,
New Delhi – 110 001.
3. The Passport Officer,
Passport Office, Eranhipalam P.O.,
Kozhikode – 673 006, Kerala. ...Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Anil Ravi, ACGSC)
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-2-
th
This application having been heard on 9 October, 2026 the
th
Tribunal on 16 October, 2026 delivered the following :
O R D E R
HON'BLE Ms.V.RAMA MATHEW, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Briefly speaking the factual matrix is as follows – The applicant is
a retired Superintendent of the Passport Office, Kozhikode. He had
superannuated from service on 30.04.2025. He is aggrieved by the
refusal on the part of the respondents to consider and grant him the
rd
benefit of the 3 financial upgradation under the Modified Assured
Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) with effect fom 01.12.2018.
2. The applicant commenced his service under the respondents on
01.12.1988 as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) appointed through a
regular process of selection, but on casual basis. He was regularized
during the year 1997 prospectively against which he and some others
approached this Tribunal by filing O.A.No.1557/1998. It is submitted
that based on the directions in the said O.A, they were deemed to have
been regularly appointed from the date of their initial appointment ie., in
the case of the applicant with effect from 01.12.1988.
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-3-
3. The applicant has to subsequently litigate for the benefit of the
financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme by filing O.A.No.523/2004.
The said O.A was allowed declaring that he was entitled to be granted the
benefits under the ACP Scheme counting the service with effect from
01.12.1988 as regular for the purpose of financial upgradations.
st
Consequently he was granted the 1 financial upgradation under the ACP
nd
Scheme with effect from 01.12.2000. Similarly for the benefit of 2
financial upgradation under the MACPS also he had to litigate by filing
O.A.No.180/623/2015. The Tribunal by order dated 12.07.2016 once
again declared that his service from 01.12.1988 to be treated as regular
nd nd
service and directing the 2 respondent to grant the benefit of 2
financial upgradation under the MACPS with effect from 01.12.2008, ie.,
on completion of 20 years from the date of his initial appointment. The
said order is produced as Annexure A-1. The Annexure A-1 order was
upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in O.P.(CAT) No.313/2016
vide its judgment dated 08.12.2016. The same is produced as Annexure
A-2. The Annexure A-2 judgment was taken up by the respondents
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.Dy. No.18309/2017 which
was dismissed in limine by an order dated 21.07.2017. This is produced
as Annexure A-3. Subsequently Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2 orders
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-4-
were implemented by the respondents on 06.09.2017, a copy of which is
produced as Annexure A-4. In this order the applicant is at Sl.No.3 and
nd
was granted the 2 financial upgradation under the MACPS with effect
from 01.12.2008.
4. It is submitted that he was consequently became due for the
rd
3 financial upgradtion with effect from 01.12.2018. However,
rd
the respondents have taken the stand that the benefit of the 3
financial upgradation cannot be granted to him on the ground that
the earlier financial upgradations were granted only on account of
judicial decisions in his favour and not otherwise. Further, one
of the party to the earlier round of litigations ie., Smt.P.Sivarani also
got an order in her favour in O.A.180/435/2018 dated 31.05.2023
nd
and was granted the 2 financial upgradation on that basis. The order
in O.A.No.180/435/2018 dated 31.05.2023 is produced as
Annexure A-5.
5. It is further submitted that the applicant had filed a representation
rd
seeking grant of the 3 financial upgradation under the MACPS
with effect from 01.12.2018 and the same was also recommended from
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-5-
rd
the office of the 3 respondent by communication dated 07.02.2019.
This representation is produced as Annexure A-6. It is stated that the
rd
3 financial upgradation was to be in Level 7 of the Pay Matrix.
rd
However, despite the Annexure A-6 and recommendations from the 3
respondent's office, the respondents did not grant him the benefit of the
rd
3 financial upgradation under the MACPS on the ground that the issue
was under the consideration of the Ministry and clarification is awaited
from the DoP&T. The applicant submitted that although he was not
promoted as Superintendent which was in Level 7 of the Pay Matrix on
the ground of non convening of DPC and seniority issue, he was
however, directed to hold the charge of the higher post of
Superintendent/Passport Granting Officer by letter dated 25.04.2023.
This is produced as Annexure A-7.
6. While so, the applicant was promoted as Assistant Superintendent
and later as Superintendent with effect from 01.01.2024. He submitted a
representation dated 10.05.2025 requesting the respondents to grant him
rd
the benefit of the 3 financial upgradation with effect from 01.12.2018 in
Level 7 of the Pay Matrix. This is produced as Annexure A-8. Since
there was no response to Annexure A-8, he submitted one more
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-6-
representation dated 03.10.2025 which was also not responded. This is
produced as Annexure A-9. The failure on the part of the respondents to
take a decision, he was compelled to approach this Tribunal by filing
this O.A seeking the following reliefs -
1. Declare that the applicant is entitled to be
rd
considered and granted the benefit of 3 financial
upgradation in Level 7 of the Pay Matrix with effect from
01.12.2018 with all consequential benefits of revision of
pay and allowances, pension and other retirement
benefits with interest thereon.
2. Direct the respondents to consider and grant the
rd
applicant the benefit of the 3 financial upgradation in
Level 7 of the Pay Matrix with effect from 01.12.2018
with revision of pay and allowances, pension and other
retirement benefits to be paid within a time frame as may
be found just and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
3. Direct the respondents to pay arrears of pay,
allowances and pension and other retirement benefits,
duly granting the benefit of interest calculated @ 9% per
annum to be calculated month after month as fell due
after 01.12.2018 and to be compounded annually upto
the date of full and final settlement of the same.
4. Award costs of and incidental to this Application.
5. Pass such other orders or directions as deemed
just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of
the case.
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-7-
7. While the entire arguments seems to be framed around the date of
actual appointment to service of the applicant and the date of
commencement of the regular service of the applicant, which has already
been declared by the Tribunal and upheld right upto the level of Hon'ble
Supreme Court, a perusal of the Annexure A-8 representation reveals the
following -
a. The date of appointment as LDC is 01.12.1988,
st
b. 1 financial upgradation under the ACPS with
effect from 01.12.2000,
c. Promotion to the post of UDC with effect from
27.11.2008 (same pay scale)
nd
d. 2 financial upgradation under the MACPS with
effect from 01.12.2008 in the then scale of pay of PB-1 +
GP Rs.2800/-.
e. Promoted to the post of Assistant Superintendent
which was in Level 6 of the Pay Matrix ie., PB-2 + GP
Rs.4200/- with effect from 01.04.2017.
rd
8. The claim of the applicant is that he is due for the 3 financial
upgradation under the MACPS as on 01.12.2018 in PB-2 + GP Rs.4600/-
ie., in Level 7 of the Pay Matrix. If we go to the MACP Scheme itself,
which is produced as Annexure R-1, the Scheme envisages merely
placement in the immediate next higher Grade Pay in the hierarchy of the
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-8-
recommended revised pay bands and Grade Pay as given in Section I,
Part-A of the first schedule of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Thus,
the Grade Pay at the time of financial upgradation under the MACP
Scheme can, in certain cases where regular promotion is not between two
successive grades, be different than what is available at the time of
regular promotion. In such cases, the higher grade pay attached to the
next promotion post in the hierarchy of the concerned cadre/organization
will be given only at the time of regular promotion. Para 5 of the
Scheme states promotions earned/upgradations granted under the ACP
Scheme in the past to those grades which now carry the same grade pay
due to merger of pay scales/upgradations of posts recommended by the
Sixth Pay Commission shall be ignored for the purpose of granting
upgradations under Modified ACPS.
9. It has been argued at great length that the illustration given in para
28 (B) would be applicable in this particular instance. It reads as under -
B. If a Government Servant (LDC) in PB-1 in the
st
Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- is granted 1 financial
upgradation under the MACPS on completion of 10
years of service in the PB-1 in the Grade Pay of
st
Rs.2000/- and 5 years later he gets 1 regular promotion
nd
(UDC) in PB-1 in the Grade Pay of Rs.2400/-, the 2
financial upgradation under MACPS (in the next Grade
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-9-
Pay w.r.t Grade Pay held by Government Servant) will
be granted on completion of 20 years of service in PB-1
in the Grade Pay of Rs.2800/-. On completion of 30
rd
years of service, he will get 3 ACP in the Grade Pay of
Rs.4200/-. However, if two promotions are earned
rd
before completion of 20 years only 3 financial
upgradation would be admissible on completion of 10
nd
years of service in Grade Pay from the date 2
th
promotion or at 30 year of service, whichever is earlier.
10. The fundamental principle underlying the MACP Scheme is that
any individual can get the benefit of three promotions or financial
upgradations during the course of his career counted from the direct entry
grade on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years service respectively.
Financial upgradation under the Scheme will be admissible whenever a
person has spent 10 years continuously in the same grade pay. While the
question has been framed in terms of the challenge to the date of regular
appointment which has been fixed as on 01.12.1988 and consequential
st
grant of 1 financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from
nd
01.12.2000 and 2 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme with
effect from 01.12.2008 through multiple litigations and the failure of the
respondents to acknowledge the lis and refuse to grant further benefit of
rd
3 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme on completion of 30
years of service, what this Tribunal needs to examine now is a very
different question. As per the terms of Annexure A-6, the date of initial
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-10-
st
appointment is shown as 01.12.1988, the date of promotion/1 MACP is
shown as 01.12.2000 (ACP), date of promotion as UDC is shown as
nd
27.11.2008, date of promotion/2 MACP is shown as 01.12.2008
(MACP), date of promotion as Assistant Superintendent is shown as
01.04.2017. This is shown along with the data of some colleagues who
nd
have been granted 2 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme.
rd
However, these are in two different scales effectively granting 3
financial upgradation on 01.12.2018 in the scale of Superintendent in GP
Rs.4600/- which would imply that the promotion as Assistant
Superintendent is not counted for the purpose of determining the
financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme, which is impermissible.
st
Three upgradations during the course of career would be the 1 ACP
nd
which is subsumed his first promotion as UDC and 2 MACP which was
to the next grade and his promotion as Assistant Superintendent which
nd
was in a higher grade from the upgradation in the 2 MACP. This being
rd
3 financial upgradation/promotion which is being granted during the
course of his career it would indicate that the applicant will not be
eligible for any further financial upgradation and any further benefit
would be on the basis of actual promotion which he has enjoyed in terms
of his regular promotion as Superintendent in Level 7 on 01.01.2024.
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-11-
11. In the light of the above, the O.A fails and is accordingly
dismissed. No order as to costs.
th
(Dated this the 16 day of October, 2026)
V.RAMA MATHEW JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
asp
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'

-12-
List of Annexures in O.A.No.18 0 /00493/2025
1. Annexure A-1 – A copy of the order in O.A.No.180/623/2015
dated 12.07.2016 rendered by this Tribunal.
2. Annexure A-2 – A copy of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court
of Kerala in O.P.(CAT) No.313/2016 dated 08.12.2016.
3. Annexure A-3 – A copy of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in SLP Dy.No.18309/2017 dated 21.07.2017.
4. Annexure A-4 – A copy of the order communicated under
No.CDR-II/441/09/2015 dated 06.09.2017 by the respondents.
5. Annexure A-5 – A copy of the order in O.A.No.180/435/2018
dated 31.05.2023 rendered by this Tribunal.
6. Annexure A-6 – A copy of the communication from the office of
rd
the 3 respondent bearing No.1(30)AD/KZD/99(K-17) dated
07.02.2019.
7. Annexure A-7 – A copy of the letter bearing
rd
F.No.KOZ/586/16/2017 dated 25.04.2023 issued by the 3 respondent.
8. Annexure A-8 – A copy of the representation dated 10.05.2025
nd
addressed to the 2 respondent.
9. Annexure A-9 – A copy of the representation submitted by the
nd
applicant dated 03.10.2025 addressed to the 2 respondent.
10. Annexure R-1 – A copy of the DoPT O.M.No.35034/3/2008-Estt.
(D) dated 19.05.2009.
_______________________________
A S Peethambaran 2026.10.16 14:56:59+05'30'