The High Court considered a petition by a retired employee seeking financial up-gradation under ACPS. The Court held that adhoc service cannot be reckoned for eligibility and, though the petitioner delayed, the Tribunal's earlier order finding otherwise was incorrect.
The order of the Tribunal was set aside and the original petition was allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 1ST MAGHA, 1941
OP (CAT).No.288 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA 863/2015 DATED 04-02-2019 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONER/S:
3 THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES, NAUTICAL AND ENGINEERING TRAINING (CIFNET), MINISTRY OF FISHERIES, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND DAIRYING, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, FORESHORE ROAD, KOCHI-682 016.
BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-2-
RESPONDENT/S:
V.S.JOSEPH S/O SEBASTIAN V.A, RETIRED CARPENTER (CIFNET), VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, WATER LAND ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-682 006.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. SMITHA GEORGE
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-3-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2020
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
The claim raised before the Tribunal was with respect to the second financial up-gradation as per the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACPS) on completion of 24 years with effect from January, 2008. We refer to the parties and documents as are available in the original petition. The applicant retired on 30.01.2008 and approached the Tribunal for the first time in the year 2015, which delay by itself stands against the grant of financial up-gradation as per the ACPS while in service.
the applicant had been appointed for various periods from 15.12.1975 in different spells on a temporary basis, which however is not claimed for the purpose of grant of ACPS. The applicant's claim is that he was appointed as an adhoc
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-4-
Carpenter on 13.01.1984 and he was regularised on 7.11.1985 and hence, the adhoc appointment as on 13.01.1984 itself is to be treated as a regular appointment. Admittedly, the applicant's probation was declared by Annexure A3 order dated 23.12.1987. The regular appointment of the applicant too was made as on 7.11.1985; which order is not produced here or challenged at any earlier point of time. It is submitted by the learned ASG that the regular appointment itself was an exception made, since the applicant was over-aged at that point of time.
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-5-
applicant continued in service and obtained the second financial up-gradation as per the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) on 1.9.2008 when the said scheme was implemented. The applicant retired on 31.10.2008 and approached the Tribunal after seven years.
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-6-
categorically found that for the purpose of financial upgardation under the ACPS, there can be no reckoning of adhoc service. We perfectly agree with the finding since, if an adhoc employee is not entitled to count his adhoc service for promotion; then there arises no question of stagnation, on which factum is anchored the very scheme of financial upgradation.
In such circumstances, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and allow the original petition. No order as to costs.
sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE
sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE
Scl/21. 01.2020 xx
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-7-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF OA NO 180/00863/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 11.2.2015 EXHIBIT P1(A5) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO PF 203/ADM/677 DATED 25.9.2014 EXHIBIT P1(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 29.11.1975 EXHIBIT P1(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO F1318/83 ADM DATED 20.1.1984 EXHIBIT P1(A3) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORFDER NO F.1.14/87 ADM DATED 23.12.1987 EXHIBIT P1(A4) TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER FOR THE GRANT OF 2ND LEVEL FINANCIAL UPGRADATION UNDER THE ACP SCHEME DATED 20.6.2014 EXHIBIT P1(A6) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 2.12.2003 REHEARING THE DETAILS OF QUALIFYING SERVICE OF THE APPLICANT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OA NO 180/00863/2015 DATED NIL 6.2016 EXHIBIT P2(R1A) TRUE COPY OF THE DEPT OM NO 35034/97ESTT(D) DATED 9.8.1999 EXHIBIT P2(RIB) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE DOPT OM NO 35034/1/97-ESTT(D)(VOLIV)DATED 10.2.2000 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE IN OA 180/00863/2015 DATED 4.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
O.P.(CAT) No. 288 of 2019
-8-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether financial up-gradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACPS) allows reckoning of adhoc service for calculating service years.
Whether a delay of seven years in approaching the Tribunal for financial up-gradation while in service can be entertained.
Whether adhoc service can be considered for time-bound financial up-gradation under ACPS based on promotion eligibility rules.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India and others v. P.J. MaryFollowed¶38
Union of India and others v. P.J. Mary [2011 (1) KHC 861]
Union of India
V.S. Joseph
Pay and Accounts Officer
Director
Senior Administrative Officer
K.Vinod Chandran
V.G.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
