Delhi High Court
P. Perumal vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 July, 2015
$~19 to 21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on : 31.07.2015
+ W.P.(C) 7177/2015 and CM No. 13197/2015
P. PERUMAL ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 7191/2015 and CM No. 13212/2015
OM PRAKASH ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
And
+ W.P.(C) 7199/2015 and CM No. 13225/2015
SHIVPAL SINGH ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr Ankur Chhibber, Advocate for
the Petitioners
Represented by: Mrs Bharthi Raju, CGSC for
Respondents.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI
W.P.(C) 7177/2015 and connected cases Page 1
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT)
%
1. The petitioners in all these proceedings claim second financial
upgradation in terms of the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme
promulgated on 09.08.1999 by the Central Government. The said ACP
Scheme assures that subject to fulfillment of eligibility and qualification
criteria, an employee who misses out his promotion in the regular promotion
under the Rules would be granted two financial upgradations.
2. The respondents contend that some of the petitioners were given
promotion in their turn as Lance Naik and Naik after they were re-mustered.
It is, however, pointed on behalf of the petitioners that re-mustering is not
relevant for the grant of the ACP benefits which have to flow independently
from the date of appointment. The petitioners rely--for this purpose--on the
judgment of this Court in Om Prakash and Ors. vs. UOI and Ors: W.P.(C)
No. 388/2015, decided on 05.03.2015. In Om Prakash and Ors. (supra), the
Court had dealt with the identical objection to the claim for ACP benefits
and overruled it in the following terms:-
"13. A reading of the above clearly shows that Clause III of
the letter dated October 27, 2014 issued by the respondents has
already been nullified and superseded by the clarification
issued by the respondents on February 16, 2015 and the signal
dated February 20, 2015. Thus as of today, the requirement of
undergoing the pre-promotional courses for grant of 2nd ACP
benefit on completion of 24 years service is not mandatory any
more.
14. The only issue which now arises is what is the effect of
some of the writ petitioners, such as Om Prakash, the writ
petitioner of W.P.(C) No.388/2015, being re-mustered to the
W.P.(C) 7177/2015 and connected cases Page 2
rank of Naik or in the cadre of driver trade or in the cadre of
radio operator. As per learned counsel for the respondents the
24 year period of service has to be reckoned from the date they
were re-mustered and not from the date they joined service
initially.
15. Hitherto fore, between the rank of a Constable and a
Head Constable there were two posts of Lance Naik and Naik,
which posts were subsequently abolished and merged with that
of a Head Constable.
16. Now, the department itself is not considering, the
appointment given to Constables on re-mustering as Naik or a
Lance Naik as a case of promotion, and thus we see no logic to
reckon 24 years' service from the dates noted hereinabove
when some of the petitioners and the late husbands of the writ
petitioners of W.P.(C) No.1717/2015 were re-mustered.
17. The ACP Scheme is clear. It envisages first ACP benefit
after 12 years' service was rendered and the second benefit
after 24 years' service was rendered if within the first twelve
years no promotion could be earned and in 24 years' service a
second promotion could not be earned. Since all petitioners
and late husbands of the writ petitioners of W.P.(C)
No.1717/2015 had rendered more than 12 years service,
reckoned whether with effect from their initial service or from
the date they were re-mustered, when the ACP Scheme was
introduced in the year 1999 all were granted the benefit of the
first financial upgradation with effect from the year 1999 (such
who earned a first promotion after 1999 were given anti-dated
scales with effect from the year 1999) and when their claims for
financial upgradation on completing 24 years service came up,
the department only raised one issue of they not having
undergone the pre-promotional course which was essential to
be successfully undertaken to earn a promotion. As per all
these persons they were denied an opportunity to undergo the
pre-promotional course because the department had posted
them at places from where they could not be relieved; and none
of them had anything to do with their posting orders. This
W.P.(C) 7177/2015 and connected cases Page 3
aspect has now been taken care of by the two office orders
dated October 27, 2014 and February 16, 2015."
3. In the light of the above position, following the decision of Om
Prakash and Ors. (supra), a direction is issued to the respondents to grant
the second financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme to all the
petitioners within eight weeks. Where the petitioners have already retired,
the respondents shall issue the necessary orders and release the arrears
constituting the difference in salary, revision of pension, etc. within 12
weeks from today.
4. The writ petitions are allowed in the above terms.
Dasti.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
V.K. SHALI
(JUDGE)
JULY 31, 2015
BG
W.P.(C) 7177/2015 and connected cases Page 4
