Vinod Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors.

Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member-(Administrative)

By way of this original application the applicant has sought the following reliefs:-

The brief facts of the case are that the applicant underwent Apprenticeship Training at Ordnance Factory Board, Bhusawal, Maharashtra w.e.f. 14.07.1967 to 31.08.1970, was appointed as Labourer (unskilled grade) on 21.12.1971 at Ordnance Factory, Bhusawal. He was transferred to Small Arms Factory, Panki, Kanpur on his own request and finally transferred to Ordnance Equipment Factory, Kanpur. On 03.02.1975 again on his own request he was transferred to Ordnance Equipment Factory, Kanpur as Labourer in the unskilled grade where he was allotted his Ticket No.147/MS/102033. After getting approval from DGOF, Kolkata the applicant was absorbed in semi skilled grade in the pay scale of Rs.210-290 during the year 1980 as C-Grade, Miller. It was shown that applicant has appeared in the prescribed trade test and has put three years service making him suitable for absorption from unskilled grade to Semi Skilled grade ‘C’ (Miller). This was wrongly treated by the respondents as regular promotion. After Third Pay Commission, the Semi skilled grades were merged with the skilled grades w.e.f. 16.10.1981 which was wrongly treated as Ist ACP for applicant by the respondents. During the year 1999 the applicant was put to basic of Rs.4000 which was in fact the Ist ACP given to the applicant but it was wrongly treated as IInd ACP given to applicant by the respondents. The applicant got promotion to B-Grade as Miller H/S-II in the scale of 4000 in the year 2003. This was treated to be the IInd ACP by the respondents. As applicant has put 38 years of regular service as he superannuated on 30.11.2009, he is entitled for benefit of Financial Up-gradation under the MACP Scheme. The applicant has submitted his representation to respondents for IIIrd Financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme which was denied to him. The applicant has completed 24 years of service after his absorption during 2004, has got only one regular promotion during his 24 years, hence become eligible for 2^nd Financial Upgradation under ACP scheme. It is admitted by the respondents that thus, Trade Apprentice who were initially appointed as labourer unskilled and were promoted as semi skilled within a short period should be considered as fresh recruiters in semi skilled grade as requirement for promotion from unskilled to semi skilled grade is at least three years regular service in the feeder cadre and passing of proper trade test. In the case of Supriya Roy & Others Vs. Union of India and Others in OA No.1604 of 2001 decided on 19.02.2010 this Tribunal has held that alleged promotion of the applicant on 02.05.1977 could not be deemed to be a promotion and further held that the employees who has completed 24 years of service and have got only one promotion within 24 years are entitled for 2^nd Financial Upgradation under ACP scheme. The applicant has retired on 30.10.2009 and during his service the MACP scheme come into force w.e.f. 01.09.2008. The applicant is entitled to benefits of MACP w.e.f. 01.09.2008. The applicant has represented this fact to respondents in his representation dated 16.08.2010 and respondents have not taken any action on that non grant of MACP to him which is violative of article 14 and hence requested to allow this original applicant and to direct the respondents to grant two financial upgradation under ACP scheme w.e.f. 09.08.1999 without treating the observation from un skilled to semi skilled grade as first promotion and to grant MACP scheme w.e.f. 01.09.2008.

In their counter reply the respondents have submitted that the applicant was appointed as Labour ‘B’ on 21.12.1971 in the pay scale of Rs.70-85, promoted to Miller ‘C’ w.e.f. 01.07.1980 in the pay scale of Rs.210-290 which was revised to Rs.260-400. He was granted upgraded pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 w.e.f. 09.08.1999 (ACP-II). He was promoted to Miller/Highly Skilled w.e.f. 20.05.2003 in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000. He was granted upgraded pay of Rs.5200-20200+2800 (Grade Pay) (MACP-II) w.e.f. 01.09.2008 who was further granted upgraded pay scale of Rs.9300-34800+4200 w.e.f. 01.09.2008.

The applicant has got first promotion w.e.f. 01.07.1980 when he was promoted from Labour ‘B’ to Miller ‘C’. The applicant was granted upgraded pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 w.e.f. 09.08.1999 under ACP-II, after completion of 24 years of regular service. The applicant was given MACP-II and MACP-III was given vide factory Order Part-II No.530 dated 13.05.2011.

The case of the applicant is different from the case of Supriya Roy Vs. Union of India & Others as the applicant has spent 9 years of his service in the Labourer post and was promoted on passing of trade test. It is also mentioned that the applicant was an Ex-Trade Apprentice. The applicant in all his pleadings of the instant original application has highlighted upon the two points based on which he is claiming similarity with the other case. On being appointed as Labourer and subsequently promoted as Semi Skilled workman, his promotion to Semi-skilled workman, should be treated as conversion as he was one of the Trade Apprentices. In the quoted Court judgment, the applicants were similarly situated who have been afforded the same relief and OFB vide its letter date 28.11.2000 has ordered that Trade Apprentices initially appointed as Labourer should be treated as appointed as semi skilled Tradesman neutralizing their regular appointment as labourer for the purpose of ACP in case they have passed trade test and got promoted to semi skilled immediately (within a short spell of time).

In his rejoinder affidavit the applicant has mentioned that as asserted in para 3 of counter reply by the respondents the applicant has not received payment in pursuance of MACP II and III as per Factory order No.530 dated 13.05.2011.

Heard rival submissions of both the parties and gone through the documents available on record.

The applicant has put 9 years of service as unskilled labour although he has completed three years Apprentices training but has not cleared the trade test. Once an apprentice clears the trade test become eligible for promotion to semi skilled Miller 'C' and accordingly the applicant was promoted to Miller 'C' on 01.07.1980 after clearing the trade test. Afterwards he was granted ACP-II and MACP also. The denial of receipt of payment under MACP II and III is different from non grant of MACP-II and III. The case relied upon by the applicant is not similar as applicants in the cited OA were fully qualified for recruitment as semi skilled worker 'C' after completion of Apprentice Training and passing the required trade test. The applicant has worked for 9 long years as Labour 'B' as he has not passed the trade test and again claimed priority from the cited original application. Moreover, the applicant has got the benefit of MACP also. The applicant in his representation dated 16.08.2010 in para 4 has accepted that he has got first promotion in 1980 which is reproduced below:-

On the basis of above discussions it is quite clear that applicant has not been able to establish his claim but for the pecuniary benefit accrued to him due to MACP as admitted by respondents in courter reply, this original application is liable to be disposed off. The respondents are directed to provide the applicant the relief granted in MACP in their order No.530 dated 13.05.2011 as admitted in their counter reply provided the same is not accrued to applicant immediately. Hence original application is disposed off with the direction to respondents to provide pecuniary benefits as accrued due to MACP granted to applicant in their order No.530 dated 13.05.2011. The above exercise should be completed by respondents within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. No Costs.

All the related MAs stands disposed of.