Judgment Pradeep Nandrajog, J 1. Since advance copy of the writ petition was served upon the respondent and pleadings of the parties before the Central Administrative Tribunal have been filed along with the writ petition, with consent of counsel for the parties we have heard arguments in the writ petition. 2. That the writ petitioners would be entitled to the benefit of the Assured Career Progression Scheme adopted by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as per its Circular dated November 09, 2000 is not in dispute between the parties. That the Scheme was later on modified in the year 2008 and is now called the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme which is applicable is also not in dispute. The dispute is: Whether the writ petitioners would be entitled to the financial upgradations on the basis that the posts held by them are isolation posts or whether they would be entitled to financial upgradation in the promotional hierarchy. 3. Now, promotional hierarchy would mean that the posts held by the petitioners have promotional posts. Isolation posts would mean that it is a stand alone post which is held by the petitioners. 4. The ACP as well as the MACP Scheme require a government servant who does not earn a promotion within the notified span, to be placed in the next above grade and it is in this context that the issue whether the posts held by the petitioners is an isolation posts or is a post in the promotional hierarchy assumes significance, for the reason if the post is an isolation post, the step-up benefit would be in the next above pay scale notified by the government but if the post is a hierarchical post the step-up would be to the next above post. 5. The petitioners are holding the substantive post of Security Guard/Gunmen. As per the 5th Central Pay Commission the post is in the pay scale Rs.2610 - 3540/-. They are being given ACP benefit in the next above scale of Rs.2650 – 4000/- but claimed entitlement to be placed in the pay scale Rs.4500-7000/- and upon completion of 24 years service they claimed a right to be placed in the pay scale Rs.5500 - 9000/-; and we note that all the pay scales are pre-revised. 6. They are being given ACP benefit in the next above scale of Rs.2650 – 4000/- but claimed entitlement to be placed in the pay scale Rs.4500-7000/- and upon completion of 24 years service they claimed a right to be placed in the pay scale Rs.5500 - 9000/-; and we note that all the pay scales are pre-revised. 6. The basis of the claim of the petitioners that the next above posts in the hierarchy is that of Security Supervisor in the pay scale Rs.4500 - 7000/- and as per the Recruitment Rules to the post of Security Supervisor, 25% posts are to be filled up by promotion from the Security Guard/Gunmen. They further claim that the next post in the hierarchy in the pay scale Rs.5500-9000/- is that of Assistant Security Officer for which as per the Recruitment Rules, promotion is the only method of recruitment and the feeder cadre is Security Supervisor. The petitioners rely upon Resolution No.353 passed by the Corporation way back on August 11, 1998 accepting the Recruitment Rules for the post of Security Guard/Gunmen; Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officer. 7. As per the respondent, the Resolution of the Corporation was sent to the Delhi Government for approval and necessary approval has yet to come. In other words, the stand of the respondent is that the Recruitment Rules being relied upon by the writ petitioners are Draft Recruitment Rules. Or to put it differently, the three posts would continue to be isolation posts. 8. The Tribunal has accepted the contentions of the respondent. 9. When asked, learned counsel for the respondent states that the reason why the proposed Recruitment Rules remain proposed even after 15 years, and we highlight that the Draft Rules were approved by the Corporation in the year 1998 and today we are in the year 2013, is that Delhi Government is just sleeping over the matter like a Rip-Van-Winkle. 10. Under what provision of law are the Recruitment Rules sent to Delhi Government for approval? We find no answer. 11. 10. Under what provision of law are the Recruitment Rules sent to Delhi Government for approval? We find no answer. 11. Suffice would it be to state that Delhi continues to be a Union Territory and only such legislative and executive function can be discharged by the Government of NCT of Delhi which have been specifically delegated to it under the Government of NCT Delhi Act and as regards the Municipal Corporation of Delhi we find just no role of Government of NCT of Delhi. 12. We now know the reason why the Delhi Government is sleeping over the matter. A request has been sent to a Government on a subject which it has not concern; and who has the courtesy to return a communication sent for approval informing that it has been sent to a wrong department! 13. Chapter VI of the DMC Act, 1957 has provisions pertaining to municipal officers and other municipal employees and we simply highlight that pertaining to Group-C and Group-D posts it is the Corporation which has to sanction the posts. 14. The post of Security Guard/Gunmen is a Group-D post and the posts of Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officers are Group-C post. As per Section 90 of the Act the aforesaid flows out. 15. We find that the Corporation has already granted the necessary approval and thus the posts have to be treated as in the hierarchy of promotion. 16. With reference to an Office Order dated April 28, 2010 which is at page 55 of the writ petition we find that one Hem Chand Rathi appointed as a Security Supervisor has been granted financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme by placing in the pay scale of Assistant Security Officer i.e.Rs.5500-9000/-. Pertaining to the said Office Order, in the Original Application filed by the writ petitioners they have pleaded said fact in para 5D of the Original Application to which the reply is that the said gentleman was a directly recruited employee. 17. We fail to understand the logic of the reply. As per the respondent, in the absence of approval granted the Recruitment Rules to the post of Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officer continue to be Draft Rules and thus the posts of Security Guard/Gunmen and the posts of Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officer are not in the hierarchy of promotion. As per the respondent, in the absence of approval granted the Recruitment Rules to the post of Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officer continue to be Draft Rules and thus the posts of Security Guard/Gunmen and the posts of Security Supervisor and Assistant Security Officer are not in the hierarchy of promotion. But on the same logic the post of Assistant Security Officer cannot be in the promotional hierarchy to the post of Security Supervisor. If Hem Chand Rathi, who was directly recruited as a Security Supervisor, would be entitled to the financial upgradation in the post of Assistant Security Officer, so would be the writ petitioners be entitled to financial upgradation in the post of Security Supervisor; being directly recruited Security Guard/Gunmen. 18. Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition setting aside the impugned order dated October 29, 2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal and allow O.A.No.837/2012 issuing a direction that the writ petitioners be granted first financial upgradation in pay scale Rs.4500-7000/-and second financial upgradation in pay scale Rs.5500-9000/- (replacement pay scales to be applied as of today) and this would be done when the writ petitioners rendered the requisite service entitling them to the benefit of the first and second financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme. 19. Needful would be done within 12 weeks from today. 20. No costs.