SHRI CHINGTHAM NANDA KUMAR SINGH vs M/O FINANCE, D/O REVENUE

1

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
GUWAHATI BENCH
[Reserved]

Original Application No. 40/87/2024


Reserved on: 07.09.2026


Pronounced on: 29.09.2026

Coram:-

HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICAL MEMBER
HON’BLE MS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER



Between

Shri Chingtham Nanda kumar Singh,
Inspector of Central Good and Service Tax,
Office of the Commissioner, CGST,
GST Bhawan, Kedar Road, Guwahati-781001.


......Applicant

[By Advocate: Mr. S. Nath, Dr. G.J. Sharma, Ms. B. Bora]


-AND-

1. The Union of India
Represented by the Secretary to
The Government of India,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue,
New Delhi- 110001.

2. The Chief Commissioner,
Central GST and Customs,
Guwahati Zone,
GST Bhawan, Kedar Road,
Machkhowa, Guwahati - 781001.
...Respondents
[By Advocate: Mr. V.K. Bhatra, Sr. CGSC
]

OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

2

ORDER
PER R.S. DOGRA, MEMBER (J):

The instant OA has been filed by the applicant praying for
the following relief(s):-
“8.1 That the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the
st
respondents to grant the applicant 1 financial upgradation
under MACP scheme in PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800 with GP
Rs.4800/- with effect from 31.12.2020 and to re-fix pay of
the applicant with arrear monetary benefits.
8.3 Costs of the application.
8.4 Any other relief(s) to which the applicants are entitled
as the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant is serving as
Inspector of Central Goods and Service Tax and posted at office
of the Commissioner, CGST, Guwahati. By this Original
Application, he is praying for a direction upon the respondents
st
for grant of 1 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme
in the GP of Rs. 4800/- w.e.f. 31.12.2020 with arrear monetary
benefits. The applicant was initially appointed as Inspector of
Post under the Ministry of Communication, Department of Post
on 31.12.2010 and posted at Vadodara West Division, Gujarat.
While working as Inspector of Posts, the applicant had applied
through proper channel for selection/appointment for the Post
of Inspector in Central Excise under the Ministry of Finance,
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

3

Department of Revenue. The applicant was appointed and
posted as Inspector of Central Excise at Cochin in the State of
Kerala. The applicant has completed 10 years of regular
services as on 31.12.2020 but till date, he has not been granted
st
the 1 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the
Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-. The applicant has submitted
representations on 16.06.2023, 15.09.2023, 07.12.2023,
17.12.2023, 08.01.2024 to the Chief Commissioner, CGST and
st
Customs, Guwahati Zone against withholding of his 1 MACP
upgradation in the GP Rs. 4800/- w.e.f 31.12.2020 but yielded
no result. The applicant is serving as Inspector of Central
Goods and Service Tax and posted at office of the
Commissioner, CGST, Guwahati. By this Original Application
he is praying for a direction upon the respondent for grant of
st
1 financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme in the GP of
Rs. 4800/- w.e.f 31.12.2020 with arrear monetary benefits.
Hence this OA.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has reiterated the
averments made in written statement and submitted that he
had submitted his Technical Resignation on 03.09.2012
referred by him as Annexure-A/2. However, as per Service
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

4

Book records of erstwhile Department of Posts which was
received by this Department at the time of joining of the said
Applicant in this Department, it appears that the Assistant
Director Postal Service (S&V) had accepted the 'Technical
Resignation' of the applicant and relieved him from the said
Department on 07.09.2012(A/N) vide memo No. STA/44-3/l
dated 03.09.2012. Subsequently, he was appointed as
Inspector of Central Excise in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- by
the Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin-I vide order
No.144/2012 dated 17.09.2012. Based on the said Order, he
had joined on 17.09.2012 in Hqrs. Office, Central Excise,
Cochin-I. The joining date mentioned by the Applicant in said
OA is 31.12.2012 instead of 17.09.2012 which is wrong and
not admitted. But considering the eligibility aspect for grant of
first financial upgradation under MACP scheme, the same is
not correct as erstwhile Department of Posts, Government of
India had granted the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- w.e.f.
01.01.2011 vide OM No. 2-12/2013—PCC dated 24.10.2017
issued by Assistant Director General (GDS/PCC), Department
of Posts, Ministry of Communication, Government of India. It
is a fact that Department of Posts had granted the Grade Pay
of Rs.4600/- to those Inspectors who have joined in the grade
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

5

pay of Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 vide OM No. 2-1212013-
PCC dated 24.10.2017 and the benefit of the same was granted
to Applicant also. The arrear payment towards up-gradation of
Grade Pay from Rs. 4200/- to Rs. 4600/- was also granted to
applicant w.e.f 01.01.2011 and the same has been recorded in
his Service Book. It is also pertinent to mention that the
Applicant was not free from the vigilance angle to consider his
st
case for granting of 1 financial up-gradation as vigilance case
was initiated by the Competent Authority for participating in
the destruction of Areca Nut from 31.10.2020 to 01.11.2020 by
him without any written order of the Competent Authority
while he was posted in Land Customs Station, Darranga prior
to issuance of suspension order to him. After enquiry of the
case, the Applicant was placed under suspension w.e.f.
25.03.2021 vide Order No. 33/CIU-VIG/GHY/12027 dated
25.03.2021 under Sub-Rule (1)(a) of Rule 10 of Central Civil
Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965. The
suspension was extended for another 180 days vide Order No.
67ICIU-VIG/GHY/2021 dated 18.06.2021 issued on
28.06.2021. Aggrieved by the said order, the Applicant
approached this Tribunal and filed an O.A. No. 161/2021. This
Tribunal vide its order dated 09.01.2023 passed in O.A. No.
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

6

161/2021 had quashed and set aside the extension of
suspension order dated 18.06.2021 as well as subsequent
orders of extension of suspension dated 03.09.2021,
06.12.2021, 01.03.2022, 25.05.2022, 12.08.2022 &
09.11.2022. White pronouncing the said judgement, this
Tribunal had not interfered with the original suspension order
dated 25.03.2021. Subsequent to vigilance proceedings against
the Applicant, Charge Memorandum was issued on 09.07.2024
by the Disciplinary Authority. Thus, it is apparent from the
foregoing para that he was never free from vigilance angle as
this Tribunal has not revoked the suspension order dated
25.03.2021 on earlier occasion. Therefore, his representations
are kept in abeyance till the outcome of final order of
Disciplinary Authority.

Counsel also states that the averment made by the
Applicant that the MACP scheme was operational w.e.f.
01.09.2009 is wrong and not acceptable as Para 9 of DoP&T's
OM No. 35034/3/2008- Estt.(D) dated 19.05.2009 clearly
states that the scheme would be operational w.e.f. 01.09.2008.
It is further submitted that the Applicant had filed another O.A.
99 of 2019 before this Tribunal to set aside and quash the
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

7

impugned Circular No. A-22015/117/2016-Ad.IIIA dated
20.09.2018 issued by the Board (CBIC). However, it is
vehemently submitted that the said Board’s Circular dated
20.09.2018 was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of SK Nausad Rahaman & Ors. versus Union of India vide
Judgment dated 10.03.2022. Therefore, no question/objection
on validity and consequent action thereof on Board's Circular
dated 20.09.2018 can be raised by the applicants/Inspectors
who have been transferred by Inter-Commissionerate Transfer
(ICT). It is further to be noted that after upholding the validity
of the Board's Circular dated 20.09.2018 by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court by going through detailed discussion on all
related issues (ICT issues), there is no illegality in taking
further action in accordance with the cited Board's Circular. It
is pertinent to state that, the said O.A. No. 99 of 2019 has since
now been disposed of by this Tribunal vide its Order dated
26.06.2024. That it is further submitted that, the Board, vide
Circular dated 20.09.2018, had stated that Recruitment Rules
of Inspector, 2016 do not have any provision for recruitment by
absorption and accordingly, no ICT application can be
considered after coming into force of the Recruitment Rules,
2016 and it was clarified that an office order for Inter
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

8

Commissionerate Transfer in the Grade of Inspectors issued on
or after 26.12.2016 (i.e. from the date of enactment of RR,
2016) will be non-est and accordingly, any officer who has
joined another zone in pursuance of such order shall be treated
as a deemed case on loan basis w.e.f. 26.12.2016. These
officers shall be on deemed loan till 31.03.2019, on which date
the officers shall stand relieved and be reverted to their parent
Zones. Thereafter, the Applicant has been relieved of his duty
w.e.f. 11.07.2024 with a direction to report to his parent zone
i.e. Thiruvananthapuram and accordingly his service book has
also been sent to the Additional Commissioner, office of the
Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax,
Cochin, 682018 (Kerala). In view of the subsequent events,
prima facie it appears that, the instant O.A. is not maintainable
in its present form inasmuch as this Tribunal does not have
the territorial jurisdiction over the Applicant as on this day and
therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed being
without jurisdiction.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that
date of joining of the applicant as ‘Inspector’ of Central Excise
in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 is 17.09.2012 instead of
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

9

31.12.2012. Due to oversight, it was wrongly entered as
31.12.2012 instead of 17.09.2012. It is stated that as per
st
DoPT's OM No. l669022409144 dated 21 November, 2022,
'Regular Service' for the purpose of the MACPS shall commence
from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade on a
regular basis either on direct recruitment basis or on
absorption/re-employment basis. Service rendered on casual,
adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-
appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning.
However, past continuous regular service in same/another
Central Government Department in a post carrying same Pay
Level in the Pay Matrix prior to regular appointment in a new
Department, without a break, shall also be counted towards
qualifying regular service for the purpose of MACPS only (and
not for the regular promotions). However, benefits under the
MACPS in such cases shall not be considered till satisfactory
completion of the probation period in the new post. As such,
'Regular Service' for the purpose of grant of financial benefit to
the applicant under the MACPS shall commence from the date
of his joining in the Department of Post i.e. 31.12.2010 not
from 01.01.2011 as claimed by the respondents. Since the
applicant had joined the Department of Post on 31.12.2010
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

10

(Α/N) not on 01.01.2006, the first financial upgradation to the
applicant under the MACP was due on 31.12.2020. It is
pertinent to mention here that on the date of eligibility of the
applicant for grant of first financial upgradation under MACP
Scheme w.e.f 31.12.2020, he was neither under suspension
nor charge sheet was issued to him.
Counsel states that it is a settled position of law that
mere pending vigilance case against any officer cannot be a bar
for promotion. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union
of India Etc. -Vs- K.V. Jankiraman Exc. has held that the
promotion etc. cannot be withheld merely because some
disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against the
employee. Even, the applicant was free from vigilance angle
when he became entitled for grant of financial upgradation
under the MACP Scheme. Therefore, under the present facts
and circumstances, the original application is liable to be
allowed.

5. Heard the parties and perused the materials on records.
6. It is an admitted position that on the date of his
st
eligibility for grant of 1 Financial Upgradation on 31.12.2020,
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

11

no such disciplinary proceedings, Charge-Sheet or Supension
was pending against the applicant. Therefore, the applicant is
st
ought to be considered for grant of benefit of 1 financial
upgradation from the date of his eligibility as per his
entitlement. However, respondents’ contention that the
applicant was not granted benefit of financial upgradation
owing to the fact that he was never free from vigilance angle, is
not sustainable as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Union of India etc. Vs. K.V. Jankiraman on 27.08.1991 had
clearly held that:
“The conclusion No. 1 should be read to mean that the
promotion etc. cannot be withheld merely because some
disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against the
employee. To deny the said benefit, they must be at the
relevant time pending the stage when charge-
memo/charge-sheet has already been issued to the
employee.”
It is also noted that the applicant’s case is also buttressed
by Judgement dated 17.12.2013 passed by the coordinate
Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 94/2013 dealing with the
issue of MACP, whereby this Tribunal had observed as follows:
“On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant
referred to a Circular dated 18.10.2010 issued by the
Government of India, Ministry of Communication & IT,
Department of Posts (Pay Commission Cell) regarding
clarifications with regard to delay and irregularities in
implementation of modified assured career progression
scheme. He quoted last three lines of the clarification at Sl.
No. 5, which reads as under:-
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR

12

“Similarly, the officials, who were facing
disciplinary action as on the date of actual due date
of their upgradation can only be not considered.
Therefore, he submitted that as per this
clarification, the applicant is entitled for MACP from
01.09.2008, the date on which he became eligible
because on that date, there was no disciplinary case
pending against him or no charge sheet was issued
to him as on that date.”
Applying the aforesaid ratio and taking into account the
entire conspectus of the case, we are of the considered opinion
st
that the applicant is entitled to get the benefit of 1 MACP from
the date of his eligibility i.e. w.e.f. 31.12.2020. Therefore, the
st
respondents are directed to grant the benefit of 1 financial
upgradation under MACP scheme with Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-
with effect from 31.12.2020 to the applicant and to re-fix his
pay with arrear monetary benefits. Consequential benefits, if
any, may also be granted to the applicant.

7. For the foregoing discussions, the instant OA stands
allowed. Pending M.A.(s), if any, also stand disposed of. No
costs.




(MALLIKA ARYA) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)

/SK/
OA No. 40/87/2024
SOURABH Digitally signed by
SOURABH KUMAR
KUMAR