Financial upgradation under ACP Scheme takes effect from the date of passing mandatory qualifying trade tests.

The nineteen applicants were appointed as Instrument Mechanics and Telecommunication Mechanics between 1987 and 1988

Following the notification of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme on 09.08.1999, which provided two financial upgradations after 12 and 24 years of service, the applicants became eligible for the first upgradation

A mandatory condition for this benefit was the clearing of a supervisory trade test, as prescribed in the relevant Recruitment Rules

Most applicants appeared for the first test conducted in July 2000 but failed, eventually passing in subsequent attempts between February 2001 and May 2002

The respondents granted the 1st ACP from the actual date of passing the test rather than the date of completion of 12 years of service or the scheme's inception

The applicants challenged this, seeking backdated benefits from 09.08.1999, arguing that the delay in conducting tests was attributable to the respondents

1. Whether the benefits of the ACP Scheme can be antedated to 09.08.1999 for employees who qualified for the supervisory test in subsequent attempts rather than the first attempt

2. Whether the insistence upon passing a supervisory test for the grant of financial upgradation under the ACP/MACP Scheme is illegal or arbitrary

The court primarily applied Paragraph 6 of Annexure-1 of the DoPT Office Memorandum No. 35034/1/97-Estt.(D) dated 09.08.1999, which mandates that financial upgradations under the ACP Scheme are subject to the fulfillment of normal promotion norms, including departmental examinations and benchmarks

The court further relied on the Recruitment Rules (SRO 149 dated 01.07.2002), which stipulate passing a trade test as a prerequisite for promotion to Chargeman-II

Additionally, the court applied the Ministry of Defence clarification (I.D. No. 11(6)/98/D(Civ) dated 04.01.2002), which established as a "special case" that only those qualifying the trade test in the first attempt after 09.08.1999 could receive benefits effective from the scheme's inception date

The Tribunal reasoned that the ACP Scheme does not grant automatic financial upgradation based solely on the length of service; rather, it serves as a "financial" substitute for promotion and must adhere to the same procedural rigor and eligibility criteria as a regular promotion

The court observed that passing the supervisory/trade test was a statutory requirement under the Recruitment Rules for the higher grade

Regarding the applicants' claim for parity with those who received benefits from 09.08.1999, the court noted that such backdating was a one-time relaxation reserved strictly for those who cleared the test in their first attempt following the scheme's introduction

Since the applicants failed their initial attempts in July 2000 or failed to appear, they did not qualify for this relaxation

The Tribunal concluded that granting the benefit from the actual date of passing the test was consistent with the scheme's provisions and lacked any evidence of malafide or arbitrariness

It held that applicants who pass the mandatory trade test in subsequent attempts are entitled to ACP benefits only from the date of passing the test and cannot claim backdated benefits as a matter of right

No order was made as to costs