Promotion lacking financial upgradation cannot be treated as a benefit to deny subsequent MACP entitlement.

The applicant was appointed as a Switch Board Attendant (later re-designated as Electrician) in the Military Engineering Services (MES) on 31.05.1979.

He received his first promotion to Highly Skilled Grade-II on 01.03.1987 and subsequently to Highly Skilled Grade-I on 22.08.1996.

Following the restructuring of the artisan staff cadre and the introduction of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme, the applicant was granted a 2nd ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 31.05.2003 upon completing 24 years of service.

He later moved to the post of Junior Engineer (JE).

The applicant retired on 31.05.2016.

He sought the 3rd financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme w.e.f. 31.05.2009 upon completing 30 years of service.

The respondents rejected the claim, asserting that the applicant had already received three promotions/upgradations during his career and was therefore ineligible for further benefits under Para-8 of the MACP Scheme.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the 3rd financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme upon completion of 30 years of regular service.

2. Whether the applicant’s promotions to Master Craftsman and Junior Engineer (JE) constitute "financial upgradations" for the purpose of denying MACP benefits if no pay fixation/increase in Grade Pay occurred.

The court applied the provisions of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme dated 09.08.1999.

The Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme introduced via DoP&T Office Memorandum dated 19.05.2009 provides for three financial upgradations at intervals of 10, 20, and 30 years of service, provided the employee has not already received three promotions/upgradations.

Para-8 of Annexure-I of the MACP Scheme and the Ministry of Defence ID No. 11(5)/2009-D(Civ-1) dated 19.10.2016 regarding the entitlement of artisan staff to MACP benefits.

The Tribunal observed that while the applicant was promoted to the post of JE, this promotion did not involve any pay fixation or financial benefit because the applicant was already drawing the same pay scale (Rs. 5000-8000) by virtue of his 2nd ACP.

The court clarified that the essence of the MACP Scheme is "financial upgradation," and for a promotion to count as one of the three permissible offsets, it must result in a higher Grade Pay or financial gain.

The records indicated that the applicant had effectively received only two financial benefits: the first promotion to Highly Skilled and the 2nd ACP.

Consequently, the Tribunal found the respondents' rejection—based on the premise of "three promotions"—to be logically flawed and factually incorrect as the promotion to JE was effectively neutral in terms of pay scale.

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application and directed the respondents to grant the 3rd MACP to the applicant w.e.f. 31.05.2009 in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 with a Grade Pay of Rs. 4600.

The court ordered the payment of all consequential benefits and arrears of pay and allowances, restricted to three years prior to the filing of the OA, with compliance ordered within eight weeks.