Allowed

Jitender Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC17 Sept 2019W.P.(C)/10030/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants financial upgradation to CRPF Constables from their initial enrolment dates under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP), relying on a prior judgment concerning similar re-mustering cases. Arrears are directed to be paid with interest on delay.

What did the court decide?

Financial upgradation per MACP from initial enrolment dates and arrears payment within four weeks or at 9% interest per annum on delay.

Jitender Kumar and Ors. Vs Union of India and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~49

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 10030/2019 JITENDER KUMAR AND ORS. ....Petitioners Through: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate.

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents

¶6

Through: Mr. Pratyush Miglani with Ms. Bakshi Vinita, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 17.09.2019

¶10

Notice. Mr. Pratyush Miglani , SAdvocate accepts notice for the Respondents.

¶11

Since the issue raised in the present petition is fully covered in favour of the Petitioners by the judgement dated 15^th November, 2018 in W.P.(C) 9189/2017 (Sajjan Kumar v. Union of India ), the Court proceeds to finally dispose of the present petition.

¶12

The facts are that the four Petitioners have been working as Constables (General Duty) („GD‟) in the Central Reserve Police Force („CRPF‟). The dates of initial appointment of Petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 are 6^th November, 2002, 18^th June, 2001, 6^th November, 2002 and 20^th May, 2003 respectively.

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

W.P.(C) 10030/2019

¶15

Subsequently, on 28^th February, 2007, each of the Petitioners was re-mustered as Constable (GD).

¶16

On 19^th May, 2009, the Department of Personnel and Training („DoPT‟), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India issued an Office Memorandum („OM‟) notifying the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme („MACP‟) for Central Government employees, providing for three final upgradations to an employee after completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service respectively if not promoted regularly to the next higher rank. The Petitioners, not having been granted even the first financial upgradation under the MACP, made representations to the Respondents in that regard.

¶17

The Court notes that in a similar instance, this Court has in W.P.(C) 9189/2017 filed by two Petitioners who were enrolled as cooks in the CRPF and later re-mustered as Constables, GD in 2007 granted them the relief as prayed for, viz., the grant of first financial upgradation as per the MACP from the dates of their initial enrolment in the CRPF.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Respondents drew attention to para 9 of the MACP Scheme appended to the OM dated 19^th May, 2009 which provides that past continuous regular service “in another Government department in a post carrying same grade pay prior to regular appointment in a new department, without a break, shall also be counted towards qualifying regular service for the purposes of MACPS only (and not for regular promotions).”

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

W.P.(C) 10030/2019

¶21

The Court fails to see how the above condition would apply in the present case since this is a case of re-mustering within the same organisation, i.e. the CRPF. The Court sees no difference between the case on and Sajjan Kumar v. Union of India ( supra ). The Court is informed that the above decision of this Court has been accepted by the Respondents and has been implemented in the case of those two Petitioners.

¶22

Consequently, the Court accepts the prayer of the present Petitioners and directs that they be granted financial upgradation as per the MACP scheme from their respective dates of enrolment as cooks, safai karamcharis , and water carriers in the CRPF respectively. Arrears should be paid to the Petitioners within four weeks, failing which the Respondents will be liable to pay simple interest at 9 per cent per annum on the period of delay in making the payment.

¶23

The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶24

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

¶25

TALWANT SINGH, J.

¶26

SEPTEMBER 17, 2019 pa

¶27

Page 3 of 3

¶28

W.P.(C) 10030/2019

Jitender Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitender Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

H C Nagwan Vs Union of India and Ors.

Pahwa International Vs Commisioner of Value Added Tax & Anr.

M/S Kohli Traders Vs Sh. Shyam Singh

Stanley Fernandes Vs Commissioner of Customs ( Export)

Narsingoju Vishal & Ors. Vs University of Delhi through Chief Election Officer & Ors.

M/S Tnm Services Vs Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Anr.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax,-International Taxation -1 Vs Dipankar Mohan Ghosh

Narain Singh, Ex. Hc/Gd Vs Union of India and Ors.

H C Nagwan Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ct(Bb) Jagbir Beniwal Vs Union of India & Ors.

Bhagirath Singh Vs Union of India and Anr.

Kamal Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shri Ravindra Kumar Hajela Vs Registrar of Co-Operative Society and Ors.

Parvinder Kaur Vs Union of India and Ors.