Facts
The applicant joined the Department of Posts as a Postal Assistant on 05.05.1983 and was later promoted to Inspector of Posts (IP) on 28.03.2002 via a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination
Source reference: p. 3, para 2; p. 9, para 10Following the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, his Grade Pay (GP) was revised to Rs. 4600/- effective 01.01.2006
Source reference: p. 3, para 2He was granted a second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme on 01.09.2008 in GP Rs. 4600/- and was promoted to Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices (ASPO) on 16.04.2013
Source reference: p. 3, para 2Subsequently, he was granted MACP-III in GP Rs. 4800/- effective 06.05.2013
Source reference: p. 3, para 2However, the Director of Accounts (Postal) later objected to these fixations, leading to the withdrawal of MACP-II and III benefits on the grounds that the applicant had already received three promotions/upgradations
Source reference: p. 3, para 3; p. 6, para 6The applicant sought GP Rs. 5400/- on a non-functional basis after completing four years in GP Rs. 4800/-, citing a DGP&T OM dated 19.06.2023 and similar relief granted to members of the All India Association of Inspectors and ASPOs
Source reference: p. 4, para 4During the pendency of this application, the respondents issued an order on 30.12.2024 antedating the grant of GP Rs. 4800/- and Rs. 5400/- for several of the applicant's juniors, but excluded the applicant
Source reference: p. 8-9, para 8; p. 11, para 13Issues
1. Whether the respondents’ withdrawal of the applicant's MACP-II and MACP-III benefits was legally sustainable
Source reference: p. 3, para 3; p. 8, para 82. Whether the applicant is entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- from 01.09.2008 and the subsequent non-functional Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- after four years of regular service
Source reference: p. 2, para 1; p. 9, para 103. Whether the applicant is entitled to parity with similarly situated employees/juniors who were granted antedated Grade Pay benefits via the order dated 30.12.2024
Source reference: p. 11, para 13Law Applied
The court primarily applied the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme as detailed in DoP&T O.M. dated 19.05.2009, which governs financial upgradations in the absence of regular promotions
Source reference: p. 3, para 2; p. 8, para 8It further relied on the Ministry of Finance Resolution No. 1/1/2008 IC dated 29.08.2008 and the DGP&T OM dated 19.06.2023, which provide for the grant of GP Rs. 5400/- on a non-functional basis to Inspectors and ASPOs after four years of regular service in GP Rs. 4800/-
Source reference: p. 4, para 4Additionally, the court adhered to the principle of parity in service law, noting precedents from the CAT Hyderabad Bench in All India Association of Inspector and ASPOs Vs UOI & Ors (OA No. 506/2021) and P.V.S. Prakasa & Ors Vs UOI & Ors (OA Nos. 194/2020 & 195/2020)
Source reference: p. 4, para 4; p. 5, para 5Reasoning
The Tribunal scrutinized the respondents' contention that the applicant was ineligible for MACP-III because he had already availed three promotions
Source reference: p. 7, para 6However, the applicant argued that the Screening Committee, not the Director of Accounts (Postal), is the competent authority to decide MACP eligibility
Source reference: p. 8, para 8The Tribunal observed a significant inconsistency in the respondents' actions: while this O.A. was pending, the respondents issued a fresh order on 30.12.2024 antedating the grant of GP Rs. 4800/- for several other employees (e.g., from 2016 to 2010 or 2012), which consequently made them eligible for GP Rs. 5400/- much earlier
Source reference: p. 11, para 13The Tribunal noted that the respondents failed to provide "clear cut reasons" why the applicant, who was senior to these individuals, was excluded from this corrective benefit
Source reference: p. 11, para 13Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the applicant's pending representation regarding this disparity required formal resolution
Source reference: p. 11-12, para 13Holding
The Tribunal did not grant the relief of direct pay revision immediately but directed the respondents to consider the applicant’s case for parity with similarly situated employees who benefited from the antedating order of 30.12.2024
The respondents were ordered to consider antedating the applicant's grant of GP Rs. 4800/- as per the Rules and subsequently consider the grant of GP Rs. 5400/- upon completion of four years from that revised date
Source reference: p. 11-12, para 13The respondents must issue a reasoned and speaking order within 60 days of receiving the judgment
Source reference: p. 12, para 13The O.A. was disposed of with no order as to costs
Source reference: p. 12, para 13Original Court PDF
Bijaya Kumar MishravsDEPARTMENT OF POSTS
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in