We have, in the aforesaid example, assumed that none of the employees were granted financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme after 12 or 24 years from the date of initial joining. The two employees had earned the second financial upgradation on the same day, i.e., 1st September, 2008, and grant of third financial upgradation was the lis /dispute. As per the petitioners, the two employees appointed four years apart and having been granted second financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme on 1st September, 2008, would be entitled to the third financial upgradation in case they do not earn any more promotion after 10 years i.e. on 1st September, 2018, or 30 years after date of initial joining, whichever is earlier. The respondents on the other hand contend that employees „A‟ and „B‟, would be entitled to the grant of third financial upgradation on completion of 6 years and 10 years of service respectively, so as to complete the period of 20 years of service in the same grade pay which was granted on first promotion. The stand of the respondents has the effect of taking into consideration the years of service beyond the period of 10 years, which were not accounted for and subsumed when the second financial upgradation was granted. The stand of the petitioners, on the other hand, has the effect of nullifying the extra years of service rendered beyond 10 years. The period of 30 years of service remains constant in the two cases and would pose no difficulty. We are concerned and examining whether the respondents were entitled to third financial upgradation under the second alternative, i.e. 10 years of service in the same grade of pay. If the argument of the petitioners is to be accepted,
