Interest is not payable on delayed MACP benefits where the employee initially failed the prescribed benchmark.

The applicant, a retired Assistant Postmaster, was granted MACP-II with effect from 1 September 2008, and MACP-III became due from 1 September 2018.

His claim for MACP-III was not initially approved because the applicable benchmark for MACP upgradation was stated to require a “Very Good” grading under the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Office Memorandum dated 22 October 2019.

The applicant earlier approached the Tribunal in O.A. No. 1056/2022, seeking grant of MACP-III, and the Tribunal directed the respondents to consider and decide his claim within the prescribed period.

Following a review pursuant to the DoPT Office Memorandum dated 22 December 2021, the respondents approved and granted the applicant MACP-III on 26 September 2022.

The applicant thereafter sought interest on the delayed financial benefits and submitted a representation dated 17 March 2023, which, according to him, remained undecided.

The respondents contended that the delay was not attributable to administrative lapse, since the applicant did not meet the applicable benchmark and his case required reconsideration under the subsequent DoPT instructions.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled, as a matter of right, to interest on the delayed monetary benefits arising from the grant of MACP-III.

2. Whether the present original application was maintainable when the earlier Tribunal order had directed only consideration and disposal of the applicant’s MACP claim, and that direction had subsequently been complied with.

3. Whether the delay in granting MACP-III was attributable to administrative lapse so as to justify payment of interest.

The Tribunal exercised jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

It applied the MACP scheme and the benchmark requirements referred to in the DoPT Office Memorandum dated 22 October 2019, under which the prescribed benchmark for MACP cases falling due on or after 25 July 2016 was stated to be “Very Good” for the relevant level.

It also considered the subsequent DoPT Office Memorandum dated 22 December 2021, which provided for review of MACP cases that had not earlier been considered.

The governing principle applied was that interest on delayed benefits is not payable as an automatic or independent right where the benefit was not originally admissible under the applicable rules and was granted only after subsequent review and reconsideration.

The Tribunal found that the respondents had complied with the earlier direction by considering the applicant’s claim and granting MACP-III after review under the applicable DoPT instructions.

Since the applicant did not satisfy the prescribed benchmark under the rules initially applicable to his case, his MACP claim was not a routine or regular case capable of being sanctioned immediately.

The subsequent grant resulted from the review mechanism introduced by the DoPT’s 22 December 2021 Office Memorandum and from examination by the Review Departmental Screening Committee, rather than from correction of an established administrative delay in payment of an already-admissible benefit.

Accordingly, the Tribunal held that the delay could not be treated as an administrative lapse giving rise to an entitlement to interest.

It also rejected the respondents’ maintainability objection as unnecessary to decide against the applicant because, on merits, no entitlement to interest was established.

Finding no merit in the claim, the Tribunal dismissed O.A. No. 350/485/2023 and made no order as to costs.