AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Hon'ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne (J):
Ld Counsel for the applicant is present.
None appears for the respondents.
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-
"a)An order quashing and/or setting aside the grounds stated in the communication dated 08.10.2024 as well as its enclosure dated 01.04.2019 for denial of 3rd MACP benefits to the applicant holding that such denial on the grounds stated therein is bad in law.
b)An order directing the respondents to grant 3 ^ (rd) MACP to the applicant w.e.f. 20.03.2019 with all consequential monetary benefits including the post retirement benefits after reconsidering the case of the applicant ignoring the shortfall in benchmark as stated in the impugned communication dated 08.10.2024 and its enclosure.
c)An order directing the respondents to produce/cause production of all relevant records.
d)Any other order or further order/orders as to this Hon'ble Tribunal may seem fit and proper."
Ld Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was an employee of Chittaranjan Locomotive Works and retired from service 31.01.2024 as Superintendent. The applicant due to his streamline performance was granted 2nd MACP in the year 2010 w.e.f. 20.03.2009 and thereafter he was granted promotion due to restructuring. However, he was denied the 3rd MACP w.e.f. 20.03.2019 for which he is fully entitled to. Being aggrieved with the same he made a representation, however, he received no response from the respondents. The applicant thereafter made another representation on 28.09.2024. The respondents vide communication dtd. 08.10.2024, annexing the office order dtd. 01.04.2019, informed the applicant he has been declared unsuitable by the competent authority for grant of 3rd financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme, due to shortfall of the prescribed benchmark in terms of RBE No. 155/2016.
Ld Counsel for the applicant submits that the said office order dtd. 01.04.2019 ought to have been communicated to the applicant back in 2019. However the same has not been done by the respondents and instead they have communicated the same to the applicant on 08.10.2024 only i.e. 09 months after his retirement from service. Therefore, such non- communication of APAR amounts of illegality arbitrariness. Being aggrieved with the same the applicant has filed the instant OA.
Heard Ld Counsel for the applicant.
It is to be noted that in the year 2019 the applicant did not receive his APAR and his case was not considered for grant of 3rd financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme. The applicant did not raise any grievance back then with regard to non-receipt of his APAR. However, subsequently, upon his representation in the year 2024 his APAR has been communicated to him on 08.10.2024 and he has further been informed that his case for grant of 3rd financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme was not considered due to shortfall of the prescribed benchmark. Now, the appropriate remedy available to the applicant is to make a representation for up-gradation of his APAR rather approaching this Tribunal. It is to be noted that under the judicial view we cannot run the administration and step into their powers.
In view of the above, the applicant is granted liberty to submit a detailed and comprehensive representation before the competent authority along with his self-appraisal to prove that the APAR, wherein, grading has been given as below benchmark is not justified, within 04 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation the competent respondent authority is directed to re-examine and consider the same and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within 03 months thereafter.
Accordingly, the OA is disposed of. No cost.