AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J):
By way of the present O.A., the applicant seeks quashing of the impugned Speaking Order dated 10.03.2025, whereby the respondents rejected his claim, and a direction to the respondents to grant him the 2nd MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- upon completion of 20 years of service on 10.04.2009 and the 3rd MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- (Level-9) upon completion of 30 years of service on 10.04.2019, along with all consequential benefits, including arrears and interest @ 12% per annum, by counting his training period from 10.04.1989 to 09.05.1990 in terms of Para 5 of the Annexure to the Railway Board's MACP Scheme dated 10.06.2009.
Dr. G.J. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, submits as under:
That the applicant was appointed as Permanent Way Mistry [later re-designated as Supervisor (P. Way)] by appointment letter dated 14.03.1989 in the 4th CPC pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/-. He joined on 10.04.1989 and was sent for training for a period of one year. The appointment letter, however, mentioned a stipend of Rs. 1320/- during the training period. The applicant contends that he was, in fact, granted pay fixation in the scale of Rs. 1400-2300/- with effect from 10.04.1989, i.e. from the date of joining the training.
That the applicant underwent one year of service training commencing from 10.04.1989. He successfully completed the training and, pursuant to the order dated 07.05.1990, joined the working post of Permanent Way Mistry on 10.05.1990. During the training period, he was paid Rs. 1400/- and was also granted annual increments.
That the applicant was thereafter promoted to the post of Junior Engineer, Grade-II, P. Way, in the 5th CPC pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000/- vide order dated 23.01.1998 and joined the promotional post on 11.02.1998. His junior colleague, Razekul Haque, was also promoted at the same time.
That the applicant was thereafter promoted to the post of Junior Engineer, Grade-I, P. Way, in the 5th CPC pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000/-, with effect from 01.11.2003, vide order dated 28.07.2005.
That the Railway Board issued the MACP Scheme dated 10.06.2009 with effect from 01.09.2008, providing for three financial upgradations at intervals of 10, 20 and 30 years of continuous regular service. Para 5 of the Annexure to the said Scheme provides that promotions earned or upgradations granted in the past to those grades which now carry the same Grade Pay, consequent upon merger of pay scales or upgradation of posts, are to be ignored for the purpose of granting financial upgradations under the MACP Scheme.
The applicant was granted financial upgradation in the next higher Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-with effect from 01.09.2008.
That the applicant was promoted to the post of Senior Section Engineer/P. Way/HQ/MLG in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- vide order dated 22.08.2011. Since he was already drawing Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01.09.2008 pursuant to the MACP benefit, the said promotion did not result in any further financial benefit.
That the applicant was granted 3rd MACP with effect from 01.09.2018 in Level-8, corresponding to Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/-, vide order dated 24.08.2021, and his pay was accordingly fixed. He retired from service on superannuation in January 2024.
That the applicant contends that, in terms of Para 13(b) of the Railway Board's letter dated 09.10.2003 (RBE No. 177/2003), the post of Supervisor (P. Way) was upgraded and merged with the post of Junior Engineer, Grade-II, P. Way, in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000/-. The Railway Board subsequently issued RBE No. 45/2007 dated 22.03.2007 and RBE No. 64/2013 dated 03.07.2013 in this regard.
That the 5th CPC pay scales of Rs. 5000-8000/-applicable to JE Grade-II and Rs. 5500-9000/- applicable to JE Grade-I were subsequently merged and placed in the revised pay structure of Rs. 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- under the Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, vide Railway Board's notification RBE No. 103/2008 dated 04.09.2008, with effect from 01.01.2006. Consequent upon such merger, the post of JE Grade-II/P. Way in the scale of Rs. 5000-8000/- was merged with JE Grade-I/P. Way in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000/- in the revised structure of Rs. 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-, in terms of the Railway Board's letters dated 03.09.2009 and 08.04.2016.
That, according to the applicant, since he had already been granted financial upgradation in Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01.09.2008, the promotions/upgradations referred to above were liable to be ignored by virtue of Para 5 of the Annexure to the Railway Board's MACP Scheme dated 10.06.2009. He, therefore, claims entitlement to the 2nd MACP in Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- upon completion of 20 years of service on 10.04.2009 and the 3rd MACP in Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- (Level-9) upon completion of 30 years of service on 10.04.2019. He submits that similar benefits were granted to Gautam Malakar and Razekul Haque, who are stated to be junior to him, vide order dated 03.02.2022, and to another junior, Saji Sebastian, vide speaking order dated 24.03.2023.
That the applicant further contends that his training period from 10.04.1989 to 09.05.1990 is liable to be counted for the purpose of grant of ACP/MACP benefits. In support thereof, learned counsel relies upon Establishment Serial No. 109/1992 and the order dated 22.03.2012 passed by the CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 192/2010, wherein the training period was held to be reckonable for the purpose of ACP, which order was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in W.P.(C) No. 12425/2012 vide order dated 06.02.2013. The applicant further states that the said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upon dismissal of the SLP on 02.08.2013.
Learned counsel further relies upon the order dated 14.11.2017 passed by the CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 260/073/2014, which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in W.P.(C) No. 6963/2018 vide judgment dated 03.01.2019 and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 22.10.2019 in SLP(C) Diary No. 28896/2010. The applicant also relies upon the case of another similarly situated employee, namely, Sri Gautam Banerjee.
Learned counsel submits that the issue is also covered by various judicial precedents, including the following:
Order dated 01.09.2016 passed by the CAT, Principal Bench in O.A. No. 1386/2013, which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide judgment and order dated 21.11.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 10995/2016 and thereafter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeals No. 3129-3130/2019 vide judgment dated 18.01.2024.
Order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 260/263/2021.
Order dated 01.01.2018 passed by the CAT, Jabalpur Bench in O.A. No. 203/428/2015.
Order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the CAT, Kolkata Bench in O.A. No. 350/564/2024.
Orderdated 20.02.2026 passed by the CAT, Principal Bench in O.A. No. 4179/2023.
In view of the above conspectus of thecase, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the O.A. be allowed by setting aside the Speaking Order dated 10.03.2025 by granting relief as prayed for in this OA.
Opposing the claim of the applicant, and referring to the written submissions filed on behalf of the respondents, Sri A. Kundu, learned Addl. CGSC for the respondents, submits that the applicant was granted his first promotion to the post of Junior Engineer/P. Way/II in the scale of Rs. 5000-8000/-(PB-2) with effect from 11.02.1998 and was thereafter again promoted to the post of Junior Engineer-I/P. Way in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000/- (PB-2) with effect from 01.11.2003. He was subsequently granted financial upgradation in the scale of Rs. 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- (Level-7) with effect from 01.09.2008, as he had already availed one promotion. He was thereafter promoted to the post of SSE in the scale of Rs. 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- (Level-7) on 30.04.2013 and joined the said post on 01.05.2013. Since he was already drawing Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01.09.2008, no further pay fixation was made on his promotion to the post of SSE. Thereafter, he was granted the 3rd MACP with effect from 01.09.2018 in Level-8, upon completion of the prescribed period of regular service, in terms of Railway Board RBE No. 101/2009.
Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that statutory rules, executive instructions or orders ordinarily operate prospectively unless retrospective operation is expressly provided. He submits that, as per the extant policy, the applicant had already been granted the benefit of proforma fixation from the date of his initial engagement as Apprentice PWM on 10.04.1989 up to his joining the working post on 10.05.1990. He further submits that, following the procedure under Railway Board RBE No. 101/2009, the Speaking Order was passed and served upon the applicant in compliance with the order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Tribunal in the applicant’s earlier O.A. No. 135/2024.
Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the case of Sri Saji Sebastian is distinguishable. Although a pay fixation order dated 10.01.2023 had initially granted him 2nd MACP with effect from 27.08.2010 and 3rd MACP with effect from 27.08.2020, the respondents subsequently found that the said fixation order had been vetted by the Accounts Department erroneously and cancelled the earlier memorandum. It was observed that Sri Saji Sebastian was entitled to 2nd MACP with effect from 07.04.2012 and 3rd MACP with effect from 07.04.2022; however, since he had retired on 31.12.2021, he was not entitled to 3rd MACP. The respondents, therefore, submit that the earlier order in his favour cannot confer a legal right upon the applicant.
Learned counsel for the respondents further relies upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Ex. HC/GD Virender Singh, AIR 2022 SC 3942, and Union of India v. R.K. Sharma & Ors., (2021) 5 SCC 579, in support of the respondents’ contention regarding the applicability and operation of the MACP Scheme.
We have heard the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record, including the orders/judgments relied upon by both sides.
The main contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that, in terms of Para 5 of the Annexure to the Railway Board’s MACP Scheme dated 10.06.2009, the applicant is entitled to the 2nd MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- upon completion of 20 years of service on 10.04.2009 and the 3rd MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- (Level-9) upon completion of 30 years of service on 10.04.2019. Learned counsel has further contended that, although similar benefits were granted to Sri Gautam Malakar and Sri Razekol Haque, who are stated to be junior to the applicant, as well as to Sri Saji Sebastian, the same benefits have been denied to the applicant by the respondents vide the impugned order dated 10.03.2025.
For ready reference, Para 5 of the Annexure to the MACP Scheme contained in Railway Board's RBE No. 101/2009 dated 10.06.2009 reads as under:
“5.Promotions earned/upgradations granted under the ACP Scheme in the past to those grades which now carry the same Grade Pay due to merger of pay scales/upgradations of posts recommended by the Sixth Pay Commission shall be ignored for the purpose of granting upgradations under Modified ACPS.
Illustration
The pre-revised hierarchy (in ascending order) in a particular organization was as follows: Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 & Rs.6500-10500.
(a)A Railway servant who was recruited in the hierarchy in the pre-revised pay scale Rs.5000-8000 and who did not get a promotion even after 25 years of service prior to 1.1.2006, in his case as on 1.1.2006, he would have got two financial upgradations under ACP to the next grades in the hierarchy of his organization, i.e., to the pre-revised scales of Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500.
(b)Another Railway servant recruited in the same hierarchy in the pre-revised scale of Rs.5000-8000 has also completed about 25 years of service, but he got two promotions to the next higher grades of Rs.5500-9000 & Rs.6500-10500 during this period.
In the case of both (a) and (b) above, the promotions/financial upgradations granted under ACP to the pre-revised scales of Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 prior to 1.1.2006 will be ignored on account of merger of the pre-revised scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 recommended by the Sixth CPC. As per the RS(RP) Rules, both of them will be granted Grade Pay of Rs.4200 in the Pay Band PB-2. After the implementation of MACPS, two financial upgradations will be granted both in the case of (a) and (b) above to the next higher Grade Pays of Rs.4600 and Rs.4800 in the Pay Band PB-2.”
The aforesaid issue has been considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at Jabalpur in O.A. No. 203/00428/2015, decided on 01.01.2018. The relevant paras of the said order reads as under:
“12.We feel that the case of the applicant is covered by the above two judicial pronouncements, wherein the first promotion from PWM to JE took place on 20.04.1999 before 6th CPC was implemented. Hence, para 5 of MACPS will be applicable in the case of the applicant. XXXX
14.Accordingly, we have no hesitation in quashing the impugned order dated 23.03.2015 (Annexure A/1).
15.The Original Application is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.03.2015 (Annexure A/1) is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider grant of MACP benefit to the applicant as per para 5 of the MACPS within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs.”
The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal at Kolkata, vide order dated 11.12.2025 in O.A. No. 350/564/2024, has observed and held as follows:
“12.It is noted that the applicants in the case of Javed Ahmed supra were granted promotion in the year 1998 to the scale of Rs.5000-8000 (5th CPC). Similarly the applicant in the instant O.A. was also granted promotion from the post of Mistry (P. Way) having the scale of 4500-7000/- to the post of J.E.-II on 30.01.2002 in scale of Rs.5000-8000(5th CPC). Thereafter, the two scales i.e. Rs.4500-7000 and 5000-8000 were merged as per Circular dated 09.10.2003 issued by the Ministry of Railways as restructuring benefits to certain Group 'C' and 'D' cadres with effect from 01.09.2003. Therefore, it is crystal clear that in both the cases the applicants were granted promotion to the scale of Rs.5000-8000 (5th CPC) prior to restructuring in year 2003 and could not reap the actual benefits of promotions granted prior to 2003 due to merger of the two scales w.e.f. 01.09.2003 as mentioned above. In the case of Javed Ahmed supra, the respondents were directed to restore the first and second MACPs by ignoring all promotions from Mistries to JE (erstwhile 1400-2300) for the purpose of MACPs. Therefore, in the instant O.A., the applicant was rightly granted the benefits of 1st, 2nd and 3rd MACPS vide earlier orders without taking into consideration his promotion to the post of JE-II in 2002 in scale of Rs.5000-8000 (5th CPC).
13.In view of the foregoing discussions, we find that the case of the applicant in the instant O.A. is squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in Javed Ahmed supra. We find no irregularity or illegality committed by the authorities with regard to grant of 1st, 2nd and 3rd MACPS vide orders dated 27.04.2010 (w.c.f.01.09.2008), 02.12.2011 (w.e.f. 24.06.2011) and 31.01.2022 (w.e.f. 01.07.2021). Therefore, we are of the view that all the financial benefits granted to the applicant vide the said orders were correct and need no interference/revision. Accordingly the impugned orders dated 17.10.2023 (Annexure A/12 & A/13) and dated 19.03.2024 (Annexure A/18) are quashed. The respondents are directed to restore the earlier basic pay and increments in favour of the applicant from the dates he was actually entitled to and pay the consequential benefits. The respondents are further directed not to recover any amount from him/refund the recovered amount, if any. The entire exercise be completed by the respondents within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. 14. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the O.A stands disposed of with no order as to costs.”
Further, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal at the Principal Bench, vide order dated 20.02.2026 passed in O.A. No. 4179/2023, has observed and held as follows:
“7.2In the instant case, the respondents have admitted in their counter affidavit (Brief facts of the case) that the present applicant got appointed on the post of PWM on 15.11.1988 in the pay scale of Rs.4500-7000 with GP Rs.2800. The applicant got promotion as PWI-III (JE) on 05.12.1997 which is equivalent to pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 with GP of Rs.4200. Subsequently, the posts of PWM was upgraded to that of JE with the same grade pay. In other words, for all practical purposes, the posts of PWM got merged with that of Junior Engineer. Hence, the promotion of the present applicant to the rank of JE should be ignored as per Clause 5 of Annexure-I to OM dated 19.05.2009. Starting from the date of his entry into PWM w.e.f. 09.12.1989, the applicant is entitled for 1st financial upgradation on completing more than 10 years service on 01.09.2008, 2nd financial upgradation after completing 20 years service on 08.12.2009 and 3rd MACP w.e.f. completing 30 years service on 09.12.2019.
7.3Perusal of order dated 04.07.2023 shows that respondents have retained the 2nd financial upgradation at grade pay Rs.4800 on pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 w.e.f. 09.12.2009. The respondents have retained the 1st financial upgradation w.e.f. 01.09.2008 in GP of Rs.4600. But they have taken the 1st financial upgradation in the merged cadre of PW to JE as a promotion and treated the financial upgradation on 01.09.2008 as 1st financial upgradation/promotion and 2nd financial upgradation/promotion as on 09.12.2009 as 3rd financial upgradation. This is not permissible as per Clause 5 of Annexure-I of MACP Scheme as introduced vide DOP&T OM dated 19.05.2009.
8. Conclusion 8.1 In view of the above, the present OA is allowed.
(i)The re-fixation of pay/recovery by the respondents vide order dated 04.07.2023 is quashed, and his pre-revised pay is restored.
(ii)The respondents shall revise the PPO according to (i) above.
(iii)The respondents shall recalculate the DCRG, leave encashment according to the restored pay scales and pay the differential amounts to the applicant along with simple interest as per the prevailing GPF rates.
(iv)This exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
9.No order as to costs.
10.Pending MAs, if any, are disposed of accordingly.”
We have considered the rival submissions in the light of the judicial precedents relied upon by the parties. The applicant's claim is primarily founded on Para 5 of the MACP Scheme, particularly on his contention that the promotions/upgradations granted to him are liable to be ignored on account of the subsequent merger/upgradation of the relevant posts and pay scales. The respondents, on the other hand, have disputed the applicant's entitlement to the claimed MACP benefits and have relied upon the manner in which his promotions and financial upgradations were granted.
The judicial precedents relied upon by the applicant indicate that, where promotions/upgradations are liable to be ignored on account of merger/upgradation of posts or pay scales, the applicability of Para 5 of the MACP Scheme requires examination. The judgments relied upon by the respondents have also been considered. However, the specific issue arising in the present case is whether, notwithstanding the applicant's earlier promotions, such promotions are liable to be ignored for the purpose of grant of financial upgradations in terms of Para 5 of the MACP Scheme, having regard to the subsequent merger/upgradation of the relevant posts and pay scales.
In view of the aforesaid rival contentions and the judicial precedents relied upon by the parties, we are of the considered view that the applicant's claim requires reconsideration by the respondents with reference to Para 5 of the MACP Scheme dated 10.06.2009. The respondents shall specifically examine the effect of the merger/upgradation of the relevant posts and pay scales, the effect of the applicant's earlier promotions, the applicability of Para 5 of the MACP Scheme, and the applicant's claim for counting the training period from 10.04.1989 to 09.05.1990 for the purpose of determining his eligibility for MACP benefits.
Accordingly, the present O.A. is disposed of by quashing and setting aside the impugned Speaking Order dated 10.03.2025. The respondents are directed to reconsider the applicant’s claim for MACP benefits in terms of Para 5 of the MACP Scheme (RBE No. 101/2009 dated 10.06.2009), keeping in view the observations made hereinabove and the judicial precedents relied upon by the parties, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith.
Pending MA(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly.