JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J —Heard. 2. Order dated 9.3.2017 passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Circuit at Shimla in OA No. 063/00001/2016 whereby the benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme has been extended in favour of the respondents-original applicants and consequently the benefit under Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme granted to them is under challenge in this writ petition on several grounds, however, mainly that when they have availed the benefit under MACP and got the benefit of second financial up-gradation and third final up-gradation thereunder, the benefit of second ACP could have not been extended in their favour. On merits, the challenge to the right of the respondents-original applicants to avail the benefit of second ACP is on the grounds inter-alia that they were not eligible for the same on account of neither having requisite qualification nor skill test. 3. On having gone through the record of the case and taking into consideration the rival submissions, the ground that the respondents have availed the benefit of second and third financial upgradation under MACP and as such, they are now not entitled to the benefit under the Assured Career Progression Scheme having been raised for the first time in this appeal is not available to the petitioners because this being not its case before learned Tribunal, the respondents cannot be taken in surprise and also to condemn unheard by allowing them to raise the same. 4. Now if coming to the merits of the case, admittedly the judgment of this Court in Krishan Chand Verma''s case, a similarly situate person, Annexure P-1 colly (pages 45 to 55) has attained the finality. Since said Shri Krishan Chand Verma was also not having the requisite qualification, however, has been granted the benefit of second ACP undear the similar circumstances as recommended by the 5th pay commission, therefore, the respondents-original applicants cannot be discriminated against similarly situate person by denying the benefit of second ACP. Learned Central Administrative Tribunal has, therefore, rightly appreciated the given facts and circumstances and law points involved while arriving at a conclusion that the respondents-original applicants are entitled to the benefit of second ACP. The impugned order, as such, calls for no interference. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 5. Pending application(s) , if any, shall also stand disposed of.