Appointment of Grade D employees as LDCs via departmental examination constitutes promotion for ACP scheme purposes.

The applicant was appointed as a Peon (Grade ‘D’) on October 1, 1964

On April 6, 1979, he was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) following a departmental examination

He was subsequently promoted to Upper Division Clerk (UDC) on June 9, 1998

Following the introduction of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme via Office Memorandum (OM) dated August 9, 1999—which provided financial upgradations after 12 and 24 years of service—the applicant sought a second financial upgradation effective from the date of the scheme's inception

The applicant retired on March 31, 2002

In 2021, his representation for the upgradation was rejected by the respondents on the grounds that he had already received two promotions

The applicant challenged this rejection, contending that his appointment to LDC via departmental examination should be treated as direct recruitment rather than a promotion

Whether the applicant’s appointment to the post of LDC through a departmental examination is to be treated as a promotion or direct recruitment for the purposes of granting financial upgradation under the ACP scheme

The court primarily applied the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) OM dated August 9, 1999, which established the ACP scheme, and the clarifying OM dated February 10, 2000

Specifically, Point 8 of the Annexure to the OM dated February 10, 2000, clarifies that while certain departmental inductions (like LDC to Stenographer) may be treated as direct recruitment, the appointment of Grade ‘D’ employees to LDC via departmental examination must be counted as a promotion because the relevant Recruitment Rules categorize such appointments under a promotion quota

The Tribunal examined the nature of the applicant's career progression in light of the DoPT clarifications.

It noted that the applicant was initially a Grade ‘D’ employee (Peon) who moved to the LDC cadre through a departmental examination

Under the express terms of the OM dated February 10, 2000, such a transition is explicitly classified as a "promotion" for the purpose of the ACP scheme

Consequently, the court found that the applicant had earned two distinct promotions during his service: first from Peon to LDC in 1979, and second from LDC to UDC in 1998

Since the ACP scheme is intended only for those who have not received the requisite number of regular promotions within 12 or 24 years, the applicant’s receipt of two functional promotions rendered him ineligible for further financial upgradation under the scheme

The Original Application was dismissed as being devoid of merit, with no order as to costs