CAT - ['Delhi']
Employment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

Part-time service cannot count as regular service for ACP/MACP absent proof of full-time work.

SHYAM SWAROOP BHATNAGAR vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

CAT - ['Delhi']JUDGMENT: August 25, 20263 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Part-time service cannot count as regular service for ACP/MACP absent proof of full-time work.. SHYAM SWAROOP BHATNAGAR vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI. CAT - ['Delhi']. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The five applicants had initially joined the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as Community Workers (Part Time) between 1981 and 1984 and were subsequently regularized through separate office orders.

Source reference: p. 3–4

They sought financial upgradation under the ACP/MACP Schemes by counting their earlier part-time service as qualifying regular service.

Source reference: p. 3–4

In an earlier OA, the Tribunal directed the respondents to consider their representations; pursuant thereto, the MCD passed a speaking order dated 09.09.2022 rejecting the claim.

Source reference: p. 3–4

During the proceedings, the respondents also produced an MCD circular dated 05.02.2024, based on Resolution No. 80 dated 31.10.2023, providing for counting 50% of part-time Community Worker service for pensionary/ACP/MACP purposes.

Source reference: p. 12
02

Issues

Whether the applicants’ service rendered as part-time Community Workers prior to regularization could be treated as qualifying regular service for grant of ACP/MACP financial upgradations.

Source reference: p. 10–12, 13–16

Whether the decisions in Urmil Chopra, Krishna Kant Sharma, and Mrs. Krishan Kanta Sharma required the MCD to count 100% of the applicants’ part-time service for ACP/MACP purposes on the ground of equal treatment under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Source reference: p. 5–7, 13–16

Whether the applicants had established that, despite their designation as part-time Community Workers, they had actually performed full-time duties so as to attract the principle applied in Urmil Chopra and Raj Bala Maan.

Source reference: p. 9–10, 14–15
03

Law Applied

The Tribunal applied Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, under which the applicants challenged the speaking order dated 09.09.2022.

Source reference: p. 2

Under the DoP&T OM dated 09.08.1999 governing the ACP Scheme, “regular service” means the service qualifying as regular service under the applicable recruitment/service rules, and residency periods are to be counted from appointment to the grade as a direct recruit.

Source reference: p. 10–11

Under the MACP Scheme introduced by the DoP&T OM dated 19.05.2009, the scheme applies to regularly appointed employees; service rendered on an ad hoc, contractual, casual, or part-time basis before regular appointment is not ordinarily counted, and regular service commences from appointment to the post on a regular basis.

Source reference: p. 11

In MCD v. Raj Bala Maan, the Delhi High Court held that relief depended upon proof that the employees, though designated part-time, had in fact worked full time; absent such proof, part-time service could not automatically be treated as regular service.

Source reference: p. 9–10

The Tribunal further treated Mrs. Krishan Kanta Sharma as a decision in personam rather than a declaration generally invalidating the ACP/MACP rules.

Source reference: p. 15–16
04

Reasoning

Urmil Chopra primarily concerned pension and gratuity, and did not decide whether part-time service qualified for ACP/MACP financial upgradation.

Source reference: p. 13–14

Although Krishna Kant Sharma and Mrs. Krishan Kanta Sharma granted benefits in their respective factual settings, none of those decisions displaced the express requirement under the ACP/MACP Schemes that qualifying service must be regular service.

Source reference: p. 14–16

The principle in Raj Bala Maan required the applicants to establish that they had actually performed full-time duties, as had been established in Urmil Chopra; however, the applicants produced no material proving that their part-time service was in fact full-time service rendered against sanctioned posts.

Source reference: p. 14–16

Consequently, the applicants could not claim automatic parity or counting of 100% of their part-time service.

Source reference: p. 14–16

The Tribunal nevertheless left it open to the respondents to implement the MCD’s subsequent policy providing for counting 50% of such service for pensionary/ACP/MACP purposes.

Source reference: p. 16
05

Holding

The Tribunal held that the applicants were not entitled to count 100% of their pre-regularization part-time Community Worker service as qualifying regular service for ACP/MACP benefits.

The cited judgments did not operate as an unrestricted rule applicable to all similarly situated employees, and the applicants had failed to prove actual full-time work.

Source reference: p. 14–16

The OA was accordingly dismissed for lack of merit; no order as to costs was made, and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of.

Source reference: p. 17

The respondents were left to implement, as applicable, the MCD policy/circular providing for counting 50% of part-time service.

Source reference: p. 16
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Administrative Tribunals Act, 19851

CAT - ['Delhi']

Original Court PDF

SHYAM SWAROOP BHATNAGARvsMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

CAT - ['Delhi'] · August 25, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment