Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1720 (HP)

Govind Ram v. Union of India

2014-11-21

RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2014
JUDGMENT : Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both the petitions, the same are taken up together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. However, facts of CWP No. 8272/2014 have been taken into consideration for clarity sake. 2. Petitioner was appointed in S.S.B. as Constable in the category of combatized cadre on 20.8.1974. Petitioner completed 24 years of regular service in the year 1998. Respondent issued office memorandum dated 9.8.1999 whereby Assured Career Progression Scheme was introduced. Conditions of grant of Assured Career Profession Scheme are annexed as Annexure P-1. Para 15 of the same reads as under: ?15. Subject to condition No.4 above, in cases where the employees have already completed 24 years of regular service, with or without a promotion, the second financial upgradation under the scheme shall be granted directly. Further, in order to rationalize unequal level of stagnation, benefit of surplus regular service (not taken into account for the first upgradation under the scheme) shall be given at the subsequent stage (second) of financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme as a one time measure. In other words, in respect of employees who have already rendered more than 12 years but less than 24 years of regular service, while the first financial upgradation shall be granted immediately, the surplus regular service beyond the first 12 years shall also be counted towards the next 12 years, of regular service required for grant of the second financial upgradation and, consequently, they shall be considered for the second financial upgradation also as and when they complete 24 years of regular service, without waiting for completion of 12 more years of regular service after the first financial upgradation already granted under the Scheme.? 3. Petitioner was promoted as Head Constable in the year 2001. He superannuated in the year 2009. The Ministry of Finance, Government of India vide order dated 23.8.2012 agreed to the proposal of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India for implementation of the Delhi High Court orders for the grant of benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. Similarly, Ministry of Home Affairs issued office order dated 27.8.2012 stating that the Ministry of Finance has agreed to implement the orders of the Delhi High Court for the grant of benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. Similarly, Ministry of Home Affairs issued office order dated 27.8.2012 stating that the Ministry of Finance has agreed to implement the orders of the Delhi High Court for the grant of benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. In furtherance of office orders dated 23.8.2012 and 27.8.2012, respondent No.3, i.e. Director General (SSB) sent a copy of office orders 23.8.2012 and 27.8.2012 to all the concerned including the Commandants of all the Battalions for information and necessary compliance. Respondent No.3 on 3.5.2013 requested all the concerns including the Commandants of all the Battalions to confirm grant of financial upgradation under Assured Career Progression Scheme to the post of Sub Inspector to all the eligible Constables/Head Constables including retired personnel in accordance with the original Assured Career Progression Scheme of the year 1999. Representation was made by the petitioner. Representation was rejected by the respondents on 16.9.2014 only on the ground that as per instructions, petitioner was not entitled to grant of 2nd financial up-gradation benefits w.e.f. 9.8.1999 without fulfilling the normal promotion norms/qualifying mandatory pre-promotional course in accordance with original ACP Scheme and MHA letter dated 19.6.2001. Memorandum dated 16.9.2014 is contrary to the scheme. Petitioner was entitled to benefit of ACP scheme immediately after the completion of 24 years as per para 15, as quoted hereinabove. It was for the respondents to ensure to make the petitioner to undergo mandatory pre-promotional course. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner was sent to undergo mandatory pre-promotional course and he has refused to undergo the same. According to the scheme, the financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme was purely personal to the employee and has no relevance to his seniority position. It merely contemplates placement on personal basis in the higher pay scale and was to be treated actual/functional promotion of the employees concerned. Petitioner has earned only one promotion throughout his career when he was promoted as Head Constable in the year 2001. The condition, if any, imposed in the ACP scheme would be deemed to have been waived. 4. Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Home Affairs have observed to scrupulously implement the judgment subject to verification of number of years put in by the petitioners in regular services. Respondent No.3 has also issued instructions to all the concerned including Commandants of all the Battalions to grant the benefits of the ACP scheme. 5. 4. Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Home Affairs have observed to scrupulously implement the judgment subject to verification of number of years put in by the petitioners in regular services. Respondent No.3 has also issued instructions to all the concerned including Commandants of all the Battalions to grant the benefits of the ACP scheme. 5. The memorandum dated 16.9.2014 is against the judgment of the Delhi High Court rendered in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2987/2014 dated 26.5.2014 titled as Bachitter Singh Vs. Union of India and others. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under: ?In view of the aforesaid statement made by counsel for the respondents and keeping in view the fact that the issue is covered by a number of decisions of this court, we grant the prayer made by the writ petitioners for grant of benefits under the Scheme (s) subject to the verification of the number of years put in by the writ petitioners in regular service. The benefits shall be granted to the petitioners expeditiously but not later than three months from today.? 6. Case of the petitioner is squarely covered by office orders dated 23.8.2012 and 27.8.2012 issued by the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Home Affairs. Necessary directions have been issued by respondent No.3 to implement the scheme qua the petitioners and similarly situate persons as per original Assured Career Progression Scheme of the year 1999. Petitioner in CWP No. 8272/2014 has superannuated on 1.8.2009 and petitioner in CWP No. 8376/2014 has superannuated on 31.7.2008. Respondents were expected to redress the grievance of the petitioners of their own. They were fully eligible for the grant of benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme after the completion of requisite number of years of service. The action of the respondents not to release the monetary benefits to the petitioners as per Assured Career Progression Scheme, 1999 is arbitrary and thus violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, in view of the analysis and discussion made hereinabove, the writ petitions are allowed. Respondents are directed to grant to the petitioners pay scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000 from 1999 and thereafter fix their pay in the pay scale of Rs. 7300-34800 plus Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- with effect from 1.1.2006. 7. Accordingly, in view of the analysis and discussion made hereinabove, the writ petitions are allowed. Respondents are directed to grant to the petitioners pay scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000 from 1999 and thereafter fix their pay in the pay scale of Rs. 7300-34800 plus Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- with effect from 1.1.2006. Respondents are also directed to release the arrears of salary since 1999 till the date of retirement of the petitioners alongwith interest @ 9% per annum within a period of eight weeks from today. Pension of the petitioners shall also be worked out accordingly. Pending application (s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.