Madras High Court
V.Danasekaran vs Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduate on 16 April, 2025
WP.No.25072 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on 24.02.2025
Pronounced on 16.04.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
WP.No.25072 of 2018
1.V.Danasekaran,
S/o Vasi
2.V.Palanisamy,
S/o.Vembana Counder. .... Petitioners
Vs.
1.Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduate
Institute of Dental Sciences,
Gorimedu, Puducherry represented
by the Dean.
2.The Secretary to Government (Health),
Chief Secretariat, Puducherry. .... Respondents
Prayer :-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to
grant the benefit of second MACP with effect from 01.04.2002 in the Pay
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
WP.No.25072 of 2018
Scale of Rs.9300-37800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- and 3rd MACP with
effect from 01.04.2012 in the same PB-3 with grade pay of Rs.5400/- to the
petitioners with arrears with effect from 01.09.2008 and 01.04.2012.
For Appellants : Mr.V.Ajayakumar
For Respondent : Mr.M.Nirmalkumar, GA, Pondy.
ORDER
This Writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to grant the
benefit of the second MACP with effect from 01.04.2002 in the Pay Scale of
Rs.9300-37800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- and the 3rd MACP with effect
from 01.04.2012 in the same PB-3 with a grade pay of Rs.5400/- to the
petitioners with arrears with effect from 01.09.2008 and 01.04.2012.
2.Heard Mr. V.Ajayakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.M.Nirmalkumar, learned Government Advocate( Pondicherry) for the
respondents 1 & 2 and perused the materials available on record.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners
joined the government service in April 1982. They have been sent on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
deputation to the 1st respondent's institution on 15.03.1995 and 22.04.1997,
respectively. On 01.10.1999, the petitioners were absorbed permanently into
the 1st respondent's institution. The first Assured Career Progression
scheme [ACP] was granted to the petitioners on 09.08.1999. The second
Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP] scheme was extended to
them on 01.10.2009 after 10 years of completion from the date of their
absorption. The scheme of Assured Career Progression was in force till
31.08.2008. The Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP] scheme
came into force on 01.09.2008. Under the said scheme upgradation will be
granted on completion of 10 years, 20 years, and 30 years of service from
the date of direct entry into service.
4. The completion of regular service for upgradation will be taken
from the date of initial joining in the entry on a regular basis. Both the
petitioners are entitled to get the financial benefit under the II and III
Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP] scheme based on their
respective date of entry into the service from April 1982.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
5. The contention of the petitioners is that when the date of
absorption, i.e., 01.10.1999 is considered as the date of commencement of
service for the purpose of Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP],
the petitioners will lose their service from the years 1982-1999. It is claimed
that all other institutes follow the Modified Assured Career Progression
[MACP] scheme, the same system of counting the services of the employees
from the date of their initial appointment in accordance with the Rules. The
petitioners retired from service on 31.01.2018 and 31.05.2018, respectively.
6. The learned Government Advocate (Pondicherry) for respondents 1
and 2 submitted that the regular service for the purpose of the Modified
Assured Career Progression [MACP] shall commence from the date of
joining the post in direct entry grade on a regular basis either through direct
recruitment, absorption, or re-employment. The service rendered on an ad
hoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training
shall not be taken into reckoning.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
7. By considering the fact that the petitioners have got their regular
service commenced only from 01.10.1999, the respondent has sanctioned
the Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP] by counting the services
of the petitioners from the date of their absorption, i.e., 01.10.1999.
Originally the petitioners were working as radiographers in the Health
Department of Pondicherry. They continued their services till the years
1995-1997 respectively, in the Health Department itself.
8. As per the regulation governing the scheme MACP issued by the
Government of India, the following criteria have been given to counting the
regular service of a person for the purpose of the Modified Assured Career
Progression [MACP]; para Nos. 9 & 10 of the scheme read as under:
"Para.9: Regular Service for the purpose of the
MACPS shall commence from the date of joining of a post in
direct entry grade on a regular basis either on direct
recruitment basis or on absorption/ re-employment basis.
Service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular
appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken
into reckoning. However, past continuous regular service in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
another Government Department in a post carrying same
grade pay prior to regular appointment in a new
Department, without a break, shall also be counted towards
qualifying regular service for the purposes of MACPS only
(and not for regular promotions). However, benefits under
the MACPS in such cases shall not be considered till the
satisfactory completion of the probation period in the new
post.
Para 10: Past service rendered by a Government
employee in a State Government /Statutory Body
/Autonomous body/Public Sector organization, before
appointment in the Government shall not be counted
towards Regular Service."
9. When the petitioners claim that they would follow under the
second part of para No. 9, respondents 1 and 2 have claimed that the
petitioners would fall under Para 10. The petitioners were not Central
Government employees before their deputation to the respondents'
institution. They were the employees of the Government of Pondicherry.
Had the petitioners held their services in the same or any other central
Government Department the post carrying the same level of pay, no doubt
their services before absorption in the respondents' institution should have
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
been considered as qualifying regular service for the purposes of the MACP
scheme. Admittedly, the petitioners are not employees of the same
institution or any other Central Government Department.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied the judgement
rendered in Sub-Inspector Rooplal and another Vs. Lt.Governor through
Chief Secretary, Delhi and others reported in (2000) 1 Supreme Court
Cases 644. In the said case is held as under:
"15.We will now take up the question whether the appellants
are entitled to count their service rendered by them as Sub-
Inspector in the BSF for the purpose of their seniority after
absorption as Sub-Inspector (Executive) in Delhi Police or not. We
have already noticed the fact that it is pursuant to the needs of
Delhi Police that these officials were deputed to Delhi Police from
the BSF following the procedure laid down in Rule 5(h) of the
Rules and subsequently absorbed as contemplated under the said
Rules. It is also not in dispute that at some point of time in the BSF,
the appellants' services were regularised in the post of Sub-
Inspectors and they were transferred as regularly appointed Sub-
Inspectors to Delhi Police force. Therefore, on being absorbed in
an equivalent cadre in the transferred post, we find no reason why
these transferred officials should not be permitted to count their
service in the parent department. At any rate, this question is not
res Integra and is squarely covered by the ratio of judgments of this
Court in more than one case. Since the earlier Bench of the tribunal
relied upon Madhavan's case to give relief to the deputationists, we
will first consider the law laid down by this Court in Madhavan `s
case (supra). This Court in that ease while considering a similar
question, came to the following conclusion:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
"21.We may examine the question from a different point of view.
There is `not-.much. difference between deputation and transfer.
Indeed, when a deputationist is permanently absorbed in the CBI,
he is under the rules appointed oh transfer. In other words,
deputation may be regarded as a transfer from one government
department to another. .It will be against all rules of service
jurisprudence, if a government servant holding a particular post is
transferred to the same or an equivalent post in another
government department, the period of his service in the post before
his transfer is not taken into consideration in computing his
seniority in the transferred post. The transfer cannot wipe out his
length of service in the post from which he has been transferred. It
has been observed by this Court that it is a just and wholesome
principle commonly applied where persons from different sources
are drafted to serve in a new service that their pre-existing total
length of service in the parent department should be respected and
presented by taking the same into account in determining their
ranking in the new service cadre. See R.S. Mokashi and Ors, v. l.M.
Menon and Ors., [1982] 1 SCC 379 and Wing Commander J,
Kumar V. Union of India and Ors., [1982] 3 SCR 453."(emphasis
supplied)
11. However, the issue involved in this case is not counting the
petitioners' past services as continuous service. It is for the benefit of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
counting it for the purpose of counting its for the Modified Assured Career
Progression [MACP]. Though the scheme contemplates completion of
certain service years for the purpose of getting Modified Assured Career
Progression [MACP], the grant of MACP can not be automatic. The
candidate's performance will be subjected to scrutiny of the selection
committee and it is a selection committee which have to decide about the
suitability of the candidates to get the Modified Assured Career Progression
[MACP] benefits.
12. The petitioners who had availed the first MACP in the year 2009
did not raise any objection that their services ought to have been counted
from the year 1982 and that they will be getting a second MACP. The
petitioners have only made this claim subsequent to their retirement, and
further, the Modified Assured Career Progression [MACP] itself has been
operational since 2008 only, those persons who have got ACP in accordance
with the earlier scheme cannot once again reopen their cases for the purpose
of getting MCAP again.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
13. In fact, the petitioners' services with the government of
Pondicherry have come to an end, and they have also received the settlement
of pensionary only benefits and all other benefits. They have chosen to join
as new employees in the respondents' institution. As the petitioners would
fall under para 10 of the Regulations as referred above, the respondents
have rightly computed their service for MACP benefit from the date of their
absorption into the first respondent institution.
In view of the above stated reasons, this writ petition is dismissed.
No costs.
16.04.2025
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking/ Non Speaking.
Neutral: Yes/No
jrs
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
To
1. The Dean,
Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduate
Institute of Dental Sciences,
Gorimedu, Puducherry.
2.The Secretary to Government (Health),
Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
R.N.MANJULA, J.
jrs
16.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/04/2025 05:15:53 pm )
