### Service in Previous Organisation is Countable for MACP Benefits Despite Unilateral Transfer to Lower Post

The Applicant commenced service as Supervisor Grade-I at the Indian Ordnance Factory, Trichy, on June 1, 1988.

She was granted her 1st Financial Upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme on June 1, 2000, and later promoted to Assistant Foreman on April 13, 2007.

In 2008, she sought a unilateral transfer on compassionate grounds to the Southern Naval Command (SNC), Kochi. Upon joining SNC on March 17, 2008, she was reverted to the lower post of Chargeman-II.

While her pay was protected under FR 15(a), her Grade Pay (GP) was reduced to Rs. 4200. Subsequently, the respondents granted her GP of Rs. 4600 (reflecting her 1st ACP) and GP of Rs. 4800 (as 2nd MACP).

All fixations were vetted by the Area Accounts Office. However, in 2019, while processing her 3rd MACP, the respondents issued Annexures A1-A3, alleging that granting the 1st ACP benefit upon transfer resulted in a "double benefit" and sought to review/recover the payments.

1. Whether regular service rendered in a previous organization prior to a unilateral transfer to a lower post should be counted for the purpose of granting financial upgradations under ACP/MACP schemes.

2. Whether the grant of pay protection under FR 15(a) upon unilateral transfer precludes the applicant from claiming financial upgradations based on her total length of service.

Fundamental Rule (FR) 15(a) regarding pay protection on transfer to a lower post.

DoPT OM No. 35034/3/2008-Estt(D) dated May 19, 2009 (MACP Scheme), specifically Condition No. 14, and its subsequent clarification in OM dated November 1, 2010 [Annexure A17], which stipulates that regular service rendered in a previous organization shall be counted for MACP purposes even in cases of unilateral transfer.

The precedent set by the Ernakulam CAT in O.A. 81/2022, affirmed by the Kerala High Court in OP(CAT) 124/2023, which established that while seniority is lost on unilateral transfer, the length of service for financial upgradation is not.

State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih regarding the impermissibility of recovering excess payments made for over five years.

The Tribunal reasoned that a unilateral transfer results only in the loss of seniority, not the forfeiture of past service for financial benefits.

It found that the applicant’s pay was protected under FR 15(a) because her transfer involved a reduction in grade, but this protection is distinct from the eligibility for ACP/MACP.

The Tribunal rejected the respondents' "double benefit" argument, noting that the 1st ACP was a recognition of 12 years of service completed long before the transfer.

Since the 4th respondent (Accounts Office) had vetted and approved the fixations years prior, they could not retrospectively claim an "error" after a decade.

The Tribunal further noted that under the clarified DoPT guidelines, the applicant's prior service must be aggregated with current service to determine MACP eligibility.

It held that the applicant is entitled to the 1st ACP and 2nd MACP benefits as originally granted. The respondents were directed to consider the applicant for the 3rd MACP (Level 11) upon her completion of 30 years of regular service, counting her service from her initial 1988 appointment.