Two pre-ACP promotions and retirement before MACP implementation bar eligibility for ACP/MACP benefits.

The petitioner entered service in 1974 and later served as an Assistant Jailor. He retired on 30 June 2007.

He sought the benefit of ACP/MACP and challenged the departmental rejection of his claim.

The State opposed the claim on the ground that he had received two promotions before the ACP scheme was implemented in 2003 and had retired before the MACP scheme took effect in 2009/2010.

The Court dismissed the writ petition on those grounds.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to ACP despite having received two promotions before implementation of the ACP scheme in 2003.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to MACP after retiring on 30 June 2007, before implementation of the MACP scheme.

The Court applied the scheme implementation dates stated in the judgment: the ACP scheme took effect in 2003, and the MACP scheme took effect on 1 January 2009.

It accepted that an employee who had already received two promotions before implementation of the ACP scheme was not entitled to ACP, and that a person who retired before implementation of the MACP scheme was not entitled to MACP.

The judgment cites no specific statutory provision, rule text, or precedent.

The Court accepted the State’s position that the petitioner had received two promotions before the ACP scheme came into effect.

It further noted that he retired in 2007, before the MACP scheme’s implementation on 1 January 2009. On that basis, it held that neither scheme entitled him to the relief sought.

The Court dismissed the writ petition.