MACP is entitled from the date of completion of 10/20/30 years and not from 01.09.2008

MACP is entitled from the date of completion of 10/20/30 years and not from 01.09.2008 - Delhi High Court Order

Delhi High Court on 1.5.2019 in WP (C) No. 3549/2018 (Sunil Kumar Tyagi, BSF Vs UOI) had held that MACP is entitled from the date of completion of 10/20/30 years and NOT from 1.9.2008.

Earlier the Supreme Court on 8.12.2017 in Union of India Vs Balbir Singh Turn (Civil Appeal Diary No. 3744/2016 had held that MACP is effective from 1.1.2006 as per 6th Pay Commission recommendation, as it forms part of Pay and NOT allowances.

Ministry of Defence issued orders on 25.07.2018 to implement the SC judgment but the DoPT / MoF did not issue similar orders for the civilian employees.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELID

W.P.(C) 3549/2018

SUNIL KUMAR TYAGI		..... Petitioner
	Through:	Ms. Asha Jain Madan, Advocate with Mr. Mukesh Jain, Advocate.
	versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR		..... Respondents
	Through:	Ms Archana Gaur and Ms Ridhima Gaur, Advocates for UOI.

CORAM:

JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR

JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R D E R

01.05.2019

1. There are three prayers in this writ petition - one is for a direction to the Respondents to grant the Petitioner the benefit of the first Assured Career Progression ('ACP') Scheme with effect from October, 1999, when the Petitioner had actually completed 12 years of service instead of 30th December, 2000. The second is that the benefit of the MACP should be granted with effect from October, 2007 (instead of 1'1 September, 2008), when the Petitioner completed 20 years of service. The third prayer is that the benefit of the MACP should be given by placing the Petitioner in the scale of Sub Inspector ('SI') i.e. Rs.5500-9000 (pre-revised).

2. As far as the first prayer is concerned, the same has already been granted by the Respondents to the Petitioner. As far as the second prayer is concerned, the issue is covered in favour of the Petitioner by the judgment dated 8th December, 2017 of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Balbir Singh Turn (2018) I I SCC 99. The Supreme Court has in the above judgment clarified that the benefit of the MACP which was on the basis of the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission to be extended with effect from 1st January, 2006 and not from 1st September, 2008, as was directed by the Respondents.

3. As regards the fixing of the correct pay scale of the Petitioner, it is seen that in BSF/General Duty, there is no post of ASI/General Duty in the pay scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 (pre-revised) which had been converted into Pay Band-I i.e. 5200-20200 in the grade pay of Rs.2800 having pay band of 8560 with the total pay (basic pay) of Rs.11360. Thus, in the case of the Petitioner, the second financial upgradation was required to be given in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 (pre-revised). Since this was not granted to other similarly placed as the Petitioner, writ petitions were filed in this Court. A series of judgments have been passed by this Court in those writ petitions, as a result of which the Respondents extended the benefit of financial upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 to all personnel who had completed 24 years of regular service during the period 9th August, 1999 to 31st August, 2008.

4. The counter affidavit of the Respondents does not dispute the applicability of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v Balbir Singh Turn (supra) or the applicability of the other orders of this Court, including the order dated 18th December, 2015 in W.P.(C) No.11725 (Digamber Singh ASI v UOI) concerning the appropriate pay scale for the purposes of grant of the MACP benefits.

5. Consequently, this Court directs as under:

1. The Petitioner would be given the benefit of the MACP with effect from October, 2007 instead of 1st September, 2008; and
2. The above benefit will be given by placing the Petitioner in the pay scale of of Sub Inspector i.e. 5500-9000 (pre-revised).
3. The appropriate orders will be issued and the arrears will be paid to the Petitioner within a period of 12 weeks from today, failing which the Respondents will be liable to pay simple interest @ 6% per annum on the arrears for the period of delay.

6. The petition is disposed of in above terms. No costs.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

I.S.MEHTA, J.

MAY 01, 2019ujj

MACP Bench Mark – High Court of Delhi Circular

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
(Establishment-1 Branch)

No.107/E-9/Estt.-1/DHC
Date:27.01.2018

CIRCULAR

        In partial modification of Circular No.60B/E-10/Estt-1/DHC dated 17.08.2017, it is hereby circulated for information of all concerned that O.M, F.No.35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 27/28.09.2016, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personal & Training, New Delhi, regarding upgradation of benchmark from “Good” under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS), is applicable w.e.f. 1st January, 2018. The required grading of “Very Good” will be applicable only in respect of ACRs from the current year, i.e. 2017 onwards. For earlier years of “Good” upto the grade pay of Rs.6500/-(pre-revised) will be treated as qualifying/ eligibility criteria for the benefit under the MACP Scheme.

sd/-
(Shekhar Chandra)
Joint Registar (Estt.)
Date:27.01.2018

Endst. No.2623-33/E-9/Estt-1/DHC

Copy forwarded for Information to:
1.The Pay& Accounts Officer-XX1. Delhi High Court, New Delhi
2.All Reqistars/OSDs
3.Joint Registrar-cum-Secretary to Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice.
4.All Joint Registres.
5.Deputy Registrar-cum-P.A to Registrar General
6.All Deputy Registrars
7.The Deputy Registar (Budget & Accounts).
8.Joint Director for uploading the instant Circular on the intranet of this Court.
9.All Assitant Registrars.
10.All AOJs/CMs/ Private Secretaries
11.Admin. Order file
12.Guard file.

BOMBAY HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 15-10-2018 ON MACPS

 

3. The challenge in this petition to the judgment and order dated 16th April, 2013 made by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the CAT'), dismissing the Original Application No. 145 of 2013 instituted by the petitioner seeking benefit of Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) with effect from 1st January, 2006 along with all other consequential benefits.

4. Mr. M. P. Joseph-the petitioner in person submits that the issue raised in the present petition is answered in favour of the petitioner by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Balbir Singh Turn and another (2018) 11 SCC 99 and therefore the CAT's impugned judgment and order may be set aside and the relief prayed for by him in his Original Application No. 145 of 2013 be granted.

5. The learned Counsel for the respondents submit that the benefit under the MACP cannot be regarded as any part of the pay structure extended to the civilian employees and therefore the CAT was justified in denying relief to the petitioner. The learned Counsel submit that the recommendations of the pay commissions are not per-se binding upon the Government and the implementation, including the date from which such recommendations are to be implemented are matters in the discretion of the Government. Since, in the present case, implementation in respect of allowances was directed with effect from 1st September, 2008, the petitioner was not at all justified in seeking implementation with effect from 1st January, 2006. For these reasons the learned Counsel for the respondents submit that this petition may be dismissed.

6. The rival contentions now fall for our determination.

7. There is no dispute in the present case that the petitioner is eligible for receipt of benefits under the MACP. The only dispute is whether the petitioner is required to be granted the benefits under the MACP with effect from 1st January, 2006 as claimed by him in his Original Application No. 145 of 2013 or whether such benefits are due and payable to the petitioner with effect from 1st September, 2008 as contended by and on behalf of the respondents.

8. The sixth pay commission made recommendations with regard to Armed Forces Personnel. By a resolution dated 30th August, 2008, the Central Government resolved to accept such recommendations with regard to Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) subject to certain modifications. Clause (i) of this resolution as relevant and the same reads as follows:-

“(i) Implementation of the revised pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension, with effect from 1-1-2006 and revised rates of allowances (except dearness allowances/relief) with effect from 1-9-2008;”

9. As noted earlier, the only issue which arises in the present petition is whether the benefit under MACP is to be regarded as a part of the pay structure of pay bands and grade pay or whether such benefit is to be regarded as “allowances (except dearness allowance/relief)”. If the benefit under MACP is to be regarded as a part of the pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, then obviously the petitioner is right in contending that such benefit will have to be extended to him with effect from 1st January, 2006 in terms of Clause (i) of the aforesaid resolution dated 30th August, 2008. However, if, as held by the CAT in the present case, the benefit of MACP is to be regarded as “allowances (except dearness allowance/relief)”, then the respondents would be right in their contention that such benefit is payable only with effect from 1st September, 2008.

10. The aforesaid was the precise issue which arose for consideration in case of Balbir Singh Turn (supra). The Apex Court upon consideration of the Central Government Resolution dated 30th August, 2008 along with Part-A of Annexure-I thereto has clearly held that the benefit under MACP is a part of the pay structure and therefore such benefit was payable from 1st January, 2006 and not from 1st September, 2008.

11. The reasoning is contained in paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 ofMthe Apex Court ruling, which reads as follows :-

“6. The answer to this question will lie in the interpretation given to the Government Resolution, relevant portion of which has been quotedhereinabove. A bare perusal of Clause (i) of the Resolution clearly indicates that the Central Government decided to implement the revised pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension with effect from 1-1-2006. The second part of the clause lays down that all allowances except the dearness allowance/relief will be effective from 1-9-2008. The AFT held, and in our opinion rightly so, that the benefit of MACP is part of the pay structure and will affect the grade pay of the employees and, therefore, it cannot be said that it is a part of allowances. The benefit of MACP if given to the respondents would affect their pension also.

7. We may also point out that along with this Resolution there is Annexure I. Part A of Annexure I deals with the pay structure, grade pay, pay bands, etc., and Item 10 reads as follows:

10

Assured Career Progression Scheme for PBORs. The Commission recommends that the time bound promotion scheme in case of PBORs shall allow two financial upgradations on completion of 10 and 20 years of service as at present. The financial upgradations under the scheme shall allow benefit of pay fixation equal to one increment along with the higher grade pay. As regards the other suggestions relating to residency period for promotion of PBORs Ministry of Defence may set up an Inter-Services Committee to consider the matter after the revised scheme of running bands is implemented (Para 2.3.34)

Three ACP upgradations after 8, 16 and 24 years of service has been approved. The upgradation will take place only in the hierarchy of grade pays, which need not necessarily be the hierarchy in that particular cadre.

Part B of Annexure I deals with allowances, concessions and benefits and conditions of service of defence forces personnel. It is apparent that the Government itself by placing MACP in Part A of Annexure I was considering it to be the part of the pay structure.

8. The MACP Scheme was initially notified vide Special Army Instructions dated 11-10-2008. The Scheme was called the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme for Personnel Below Officer Rank in the Indian Army. After the Resolution was passed by the Central Government on 30-8-2008 Special Army Instructions were issued on 11-10-2008 dealing with revision of pay structure. As far as ACP is concerned Para 15 of the said letter reads as follows :

“15. Assured Career Progression. In pursuance with the Government Resolution of Assured Career Progression (ACP), a directly recruited PBOR as a Sepoy, Havildar or JCO will be entitled to minimum three financial upgradations after 8, 16 and 24 years of service. At the time of each financial upgradation under ACP, the PBOR would get an additional increment and next higher grade pay in hierarchy.”

Thereafter, another letter was issued by the Adjutant General Branch on 3-8-2009. Relevant portion of which reads as follows :

“... The new ACP (3 ACP at 8, 16, 24 years of service) should be applicable w.e.f. 1-1-2006, and the old provisions (operative w.e.f. the Vth Pay Commission) would be applicable till 31-12-2005. Regular service for the purpose of ACP shall commence from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade.”

Finally, on 30-5-2011 another letter was issued by the Ministry of Defence, relevant portion of which reads as follows:

“5. The Scheme would be operational w.e.f. 1-9-2008. In other words, financial upgradations as per the provisions of the earlier ACP scheme (of August 2003) would be granted till 31-8-2008.”

Therefore, even as per the understanding of the Army and other authorities up till the issuance of the letter dated 30-5-2011 the benefit of MACP was available from 1-1-2006.”

[emphasis supplied]

12. The CAT, when it delivered the impugned judgment andorder dated 16th April, 2013 did not have the benefit of the ruling of the Apex Court in Balbir Singh Turn(supra) which was decided only on 8th December, 2017. The view taken by the CAT in the impugned judgment and order is now in direct conflict with the view taken by the Apex Court in Balbir Singh Turn (supra). Obviously, therefore, the impugned judgment and order will have to be set aside and the petitioner will have to be held to be entitled to receive the benefits under MACP with effect from 1st January, 2006 together with all consequential benefits.

13. The contentions raised by and on behalf of the respondents cannot be accepted, particularly, in the light of the ruling of the Apex Court in Balbir Singh Turn (supra). The Apex Court, in clear terms and in the precise context of Central Government's resolution dated 30th August, 2008 held that the benefit of MACP is a part of the pay structure and not merely some allowance. The Apex Court has held that the benefit of MACP affects not only the pay but also the pension of an employee and therefore, the same, is not an allowance but part of the pay itself. In terms of Clause (i) of the Central Government's resolution, admittedly, the pay component became payable with effect from 1st January, 2006 unlike the allowance component which became payable from 1st September, 2008.

14. Besides, this is not a case where the petitioner was insisting upon preponement of the date for implementation of the recommendations of the pay commission. The Central Government, vide resolution dated 30th August, 2008 had already accepted the recommendations with regard to POBR, no doubt subject to certain modifications. The relief claimed by the petitioner was entirely consistent with Clause (i) of the resolution dated 30th August, 2008, which in fact required the Government to extend benefits of revised pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension with effect from 1st January, 2006.

15. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with the following order:-

O R D E R

(a) The impugned judgment and order dated 16th April, 2013 made by the CAT is hereby set aside.

(b) The petitioner is held entitled to receive the benefit of MACP with effect from 1st January, 2006 together with all consequential benefits.

(c) The respondents are directed to work out the benefits of MACP with effect from 1st January, 2006 together with consequential benefits and to pay the same to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of three months from today.

(d) If, such benefits/consequential benefits are not paid to the petitioner within three months from today, then the respondents will liable to pay interest thereon @ 6% p.a. from the date such payments became due and payable, till the date of actual paymen.

(e) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. There shall however be no order as to costs.

( M. S. SONAK, J. )                                                            ( A. S. OKA, J. )

Granting pay fixation at time of promotion to Inspector Posts on the basis of LDCE [Department of Posts]

Government of India

Ministry of Communications

Department of Posts

(Personnel Division)

No. 20-27/2015-SPB-II

Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg New Delhi — 110 001

Dated: 20th August, 2018

To

All Head of Circles

All Head of Regions

Subject: Grant of benefit of pay fixation at time of promotion to Inspector Posts.

Sir/Madam,

I am directed to say that references from various Circles are being received in Directorate seeking clarification on fixation of pay of the Postal Assistants, who have already been granted benefit of financial upgradation under MACP scheme, on their promotion as Inspector Posts on the basis of LDCE. Further, consequent upon upgradation of grade pay of Inspector Posts to Rs. 4600/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006, disparity in fixation of pay by different Circles has also been noticed by the Directorate while re-fixing pay of Inspector Posts posted in Directorate to the extent that in similar case some Circles have granted promotional increment to the officials who have been granted financial upgradation under MACPs, while others have not allowed, presumably invoking para 4 of Annexure I to MACP guidelines.

2. The matter has been examined in consultation with Establishment Division of Directorate and it has been decided to convey that Inspector Posts is not in a regular promotional hierarchy of Postal Assistant and they can become Inspector Posts only on attaining merit in Competitive As such, 3% fitment benefit should be allowed to officials at the time of fixation of pay on promotion to the post of Inspector (Limited Departmental Competitive Examination) even after availing financial upgradation under MACP.

3. This may be brought to notice of all concerned.

Yours faithfully,

(G. Rajeev)

Director (SPN)

Fixation of Pay on up-gradation of Grade Pay of IPs/ASPs under MACP Scheme: DoP Order

Clarification needs to be taken from Postal Directorate on counting of induction training period for granting of financial up-gradations under MACP Scheme on par with provisions existing for granting financial up-gradations under TBOP/BCR schemes.

A clarification needs to be sought from Postal Directorate on the issue of counting of“induction training period” of Direct Recruits in Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant cadre for the purpose of  qualifying service in connection with granting financial up-gradations under Modified Assured Carrier Progression Scheme(MACPS).              This issue, being a welfare matter, needs to be taken up by all possible levels of offices/officials/service unions with the Government of India/Department of Posts since the favourable orders in this regard will benefit lots of officials of Postal Department across the country.  The details of the issue are discussed below.

==================================================================

1)         At the time of issue of initial orders on implementation of MACPS by the Department of Posts vide O.M. dated 18.9.2009, it was mentioned in the salient features of the MACPS [given in Annexure-1 of O.M dated 18.9.2009] in top 3^rd & 4^th lines of Para No.9 at Page 6 of O.M that “service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment or pre-appointment training shall not be taken in to reckoning”.    As such, the word “or” mentioned before the words “pre-appointment training” in this sentence has prevented to consider pre-appointment training for the purpose of granting financial up-gradations under MACPS.   Later, a corrigendum order dated 23.6.2016 was issued by the Department of Posts replacing the sentence of “service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointmentor pre-appointment training shall not be taken in to reckoning” with the sentence of “service rendered on adhoc/contract basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken in to reckoning”.  Consequent on issue of corrigendum replacing the word“or” with “on”, the orders issued on MACPS [vide O.M dated 18.9.2009 and corrigendum dated 23.6.2016] have  removed the explicit directions of not to count pre-appointment training for MACPs.  In other words, the orders issued on MACPS now are not preventing to consider pre-appointment training for the purpose of granting financial up-gradations under MACPS.   However, the orders issued vide O.M. dated 18.9.2009 and corrigendum order dated 23.6.2016 are also not specifically permitting to consider the pre-appointment training for the purpose of granting financial up-gradations under MACPS.         

2)         But here it is to mention that as per the G.O.I, DoP&T, O.M. No.16/16/89-Estt. (Pay-I) dated 22.10.1990 and O.M.No.16/16/92-Estt. (Pay-II) dated 31.3.1992 available at Govt. of India’s Order No.(1) below F.R.26 [swamy’s compilation of FR&SR], the training period undergone by Direct Recruits, who are compulsorily required to undergo training before taking up Government employment, whether on remuneration of stipend or otherwise is treated as duty for the purpose of drawing ‘increments’.   Keeping in view of these provisions, orders were issued by the GOI, Ministry of Communications & IT, Department of Posts(SPB-II Section) vide order No.44-47/1998-SPB.II dated 3.8.2000 and order No. 44-47/1998-SPB.II dated 27.7.2001 and order No.44-47/1998-SPB.II dated 5.5.2004 to the effect that the period of induction training will also be counted for benefit of promotion under the TBOP/BCR schemes, if such training period were counted for increment in that scale.  Recently, orders were also issued by the GOI, Ministry of Communications & IT, Department of Posts(SPB-II Section) vide order No.44-2/2011-SPB.II dated 5.5.2016 extending the benefit of counting of induction training period for the purpose of qualifying service under TBOP/BCR scheme in respect of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant (Direct Recruits only) who underwent training prior to 1.1.1986, as a one time measure.

3)         Since, the induction training period was already ordered to be taken in to account in respect of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant [Direct Recruits only] while granting promotions under TBOP/BCR schemes [which were reckoned/treated as financial up-gradations], the same analogy of counting of induction training period for granting promotions under MACPS needs to be adopted as the promotions under MACPS are also treated as financial             up-gradations only. 

4)         In the light of various orders issued by the DoP&T and Department of Posts from time to time as discussed above, the following point needs to be got clarified on top priority basis from the Department of Posts(Postal Directorate).

“Keeping in view of orders already issued by Department of Posts in respect of financial up-gradations under TBOP/BCR schemes which were in existence up to 31.8.2008 (i.e. prior to the date of implementation of MACPS),  whether the induction training period undergone by Direct Recruits of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant cadre [who have undergone training before taking up Government employment and whose training period was also counted for drawal of increments], shall be counted for benefit of promotion/financial up-gradation under the Modified Assured Carrier Progression Scheme(MACPS) also (or) not”.

*********

Article shared by

Shri. G.Nagaraju, 

Accountant, 

O/o SPOs, Sangareddy Dn.
Telangana Circle

MACPS benefits in the promotional hierarchy – Clarification orders issued by Dopt on 17.5.2016

MACPS benefits in the promotional hierarchy – Clarification orders issued by Dopt on 17.5.2016

To view DoPT OM No. 22034/04/2013-Estt (D) dated 17.5.2016, please CLICK HERE. 

GS writes to Secretary (Posts) regarding Non implementation of MACP.

No. CHQ/IPASP/MACP/UTR/2012                                    Dated : 4/3/2013.

To,
Ms P. Gopinath,
Secretary (Posts),
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi 110 001.

Sub: Non Implementation of Modified Assured Carrier Scheme for Inspector Posts /Asstt. Supdt. Posts Cadre in true spirit particularly in Uttarakhand Circle and others in General.

Respected Madam,

Kindly refer to this Associations letter of even number dated 10/12/2012 wherein justice being denied to our members due to non convening of DPC for grant of timely MACP by Circles particularly Uttarakhand Circle was brought to the notice of the then Secretary (Posts) but unfortunately no attention seems to have been paid at Directorate level towards above said letter. Resultantly the Circles are taking every communications from Circle Secretaries very lightly and no due consideration is bestowed to our genuine demands. The members are taken as granted every time and none of the demands has been settled in our favour.

Convening of timely DPCs and draw up panel for future vacancies is otherwise also obligatory on the part of administration and legitimate right of the employees as given in DOP&T’s OM No.35034/3/2008-Estt(D) dated 19/5/2009, which interalia, provides that in order to prevent undue strain, the Screening Committee shall follow a time-schedule and meet twice in a financial year - preferably in the first week of January and first week of July of a year for advance processing of the all cases for grant of MACP maturing in that half. Directorate Memo No. 4-7(MACPS)/2009-PCC dated 18th September 2011 also refers.

It will be worth mentioning here that Uttarakhand Circle has not convened DPC for grant of 1st, 2nd or 3rd financial up-gradation to IP/ASPs fully till today though it was due in January 2011 and July 2011. Now you can well imagine the apathy of circles. Whereas, despite having clear instructions, in Uttarakhand Circle IPs/ASPs are made to suffer that results in considerable frustration amongst IPs/ASPs and this also adversely affect their morale.

Madam, department should realize that Inspector Post cadre is the most isolated and depressed cadre due to non Grant of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- and now they are struggling even to get next Grade Pay under MACP. In case this is the level of justice being conferred to our members, it is not understood why department is expecting extra from the Inspector Posts (IP) cadre and all the schemes are virtually tried to devolve to this cadre for implementation. In case department intend to have cooperation from IP cadre the department should also take care of the demands of the cadre. In view of our genuine problems, it is once again requested that suitable instructions may kindly be passed to all Circles to complete pending MACP promotions immediately.

With Warm Regards,

Yours sincerely,

      Sd/-
(Vilas Ingale)
General Secretary

Copy forwarded to :

The Chief PMG, Uttarakhand Circle, Dehradun-248001.

Bench marks required to get MACP.

The following norms are required to be fulfilled while granting upgradation under MACPS…

1) Grade Pay 1800 – 2800 (PB-1) = “Fitness in the Hierarchy“

2) Grade Pay 4200 – 6600 (PB-2) = “Good“

3) Grade Pay 7600 and above = “Very Good”

GP Allowed Rs. 5400/- on completion of 4 Yrs service with of Rs. 4800/- under MACP.

Hon'ble Chennai High Court in WP No.13225/2010 filed by Sri M Subramaniam, Inspector , Central Excise  has passed orders with direction to Govt. to allow GP of Rs.5400/- to the petitioner on completion of 4 years of service with the GP of Rs.4800/- under MACP scheme. For details, please visit the following link.

http://hyderabadcustoms.blogspot.com/2010/11/good-news-chennai-high-court-allows.html

MACP Scheme - Clarification

A copy of Directorate memo No.No. 4-7/(MACPS)/2009-PCC Dated: 18^th Oct, 2010 regarding  DELAY AND IRREGULARITIES IN IMPLEMENTATION OF MODIFIED ASSURED CAREER PROGRESSION SCHEME – CLARIFICATIONS is reproduced here in under.

I am directed to refer to this Directorate's OM dated 18 Sep, 2009 communicating the detailed guidelines for implementation of Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) and several other clarification issued on this subject.

2. The General Secretary, All India Postal Employees Union Group 'C' has represented to the Secretary (Posts) alleging that the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) is being denied to eligible official in some Circles and sought the intervention of the Directorate in clarifying the position. The contentions of the General Secretary have been examined and the following clarifications are provided for guidance and strict observance.

Sl. No.	Point on which clarification sought	Status Position
1	Eligibility of MACPS to a direct recruited Postal Assistant conferred with TBOP – It has been represented that in some Circles the directly recruited Postal Assistants who were accorded financial upgradation under one time bound promotion scheme on completion of 16 years of satisfactory service are not being given the 2nd MACPS on the ground that the officials have not completed 10 years of service TBOP Scale/Grade with grade pay of Rs.2800.	Attention is drawn to Para No. 28 of Annexure-I to this office OM dated 18-09-2009. It is stated that a directly recruited Postal Assistant who got one financial upgradation under TBOP Scheme after rendering 16 years of service before 01.09.2008, will become eligible to 2nd MACP on completion of 20 years of continuous service from date of entry in Government service or 10 years service in TBOP grade pay or scale or combination of both, whichever is earlier, However, financial upgradation under MACPS cannot be conferred from a date prior to 01.09.2008 and such 2ndfinancial upgradation for the above referred category of officials has to be given from 01.09.2008. They will also become eligible for 3rd MACP on completion of 30 years of service or after rendering 10 years in 2nd MACP, whichever is earlier.
2	Eligibility of MACP to a directly recruited Postal Assistant having qualified in PO & RMS Accounts Examination and opted initially for defunct scale & later opted out of it & who have got financial upgradations under TBOP and BCR subsequently – The staff side has alleged that Postal Assistants who have qualified in PO & RMS examination who initially opted for defunct scale and later switched over to normal line and accorded financial upgradations under TBOP/BCR schemes are denied 3rd MACP construing that PO & RMS Accountants is 1st MACP and TBOP/BCR are off set against 2nd and 3rd MACP.	PO & RMS Accountants examination is a qualifying one and the Postal Assistants who have passed the examination are posted as Accountants with some special allowance. They will be continued in the cadre of Postal Assistants in the common gradation list. The PO & RMS Accountants who initially opted for defunct pay scale of Rs.380-620 and later switched over to normal line of promotion in PA cadre and given financial upgradations under TBOP/BCR Schemes will become eligible for 3rdMACP under MACPS provided that they have not earned any other regular promotion and subject to rendering of 30 years of continuous service from the date of entry in the PA grade or 10 years continuous service in the BCR grade, whichever is earlier. Denial of 3rd MACP on the said ground is not in order.
3	Eligibility of MACP to a promoted official to PA Cadre and having completed 10 years of service in PA cadre – It was stated by staff representatives that in some Circles, the officials who were promoted from the lower cadres to Postal Assistants and on completion of 10 years in the said Postal Assistant cadre are not considered for 2nd MACP on the plea that they have not completed 20 years of service from the date of entry in clerical cadre.	The attention of the Circle is drawn to Para No. 28 (A) (1) in the Annexure-I. In case of a lower grade official promoted to PA cadre, having got one promotion to PA cadre before completion of 10 years of continuous service, it will be off set against 1st MACP and on rendering 10 years continuing service in the clerical grade/scale or on completion of 20 years service from the date of entry would become eligible for 2nd MACP, whichever date is earlier. However, financial upgradation under MACPS cannot be conferred from a date prior to 01.09.2008 as the scheme became operational from this date only.
4	No. 4-Eligibility of MACP on completion of 30 years of service from date of entry as on 01.09.2008, declining regular promotion to LSG during 2009 and 2010 – The General Secretary intimated that certain officials who become eligible for 3rd MACP on 01.09.2008 are denied the same on the ground that they have declined the regular promotion to norm based LSG in 2009 and 2010.	The attention is drawn to para 25 of Annexure I to order on MACPS issued on 18.09.2009 providing that "if a regular promotion has been offered but was refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial upgradation, no financial upgradation shall be allowed as such an employee has not stagnated due to lack of opportunities. If, however, financial upgradation has been allowed due to stagnation and the employees subsequently refuse the promotion, it shall not be a ground for withdrawal of the financial upgadation. He shall, however, not be eligible to be considered for further financial upgradation till he agrees to be considered for promotion and the second and the next financial upgradation shall also be deferred to the extent of period of debarment due to the refusal." Therefore, the issue raised is already covered under Para 25 and in such cases where due date of financial upgradation precedes the refusal for regular promotion, financial upgradation under MACPS shall be allowed.
5	Eligibility of MACP due on 01.09.2008 for officials due to currency of the penalty of recovery in consequence of disciplinary proceedings or disciplinary proceeding contemplated. The staff side represented that some Circle have not considered the cases of officials for MACP on the date of introduction on the pretext that the punishment of recovery from their pay is current or disciplinary proceedings contemplated at the time of screening of the officials by the Committees which were constituted for considering financial upgradation under MACPS	Para 18 of Annexure-I to OM dated 18.09.2009 provides that – "In the matter of disciplinary/penalty proceedings, grant of benefit under the MACPS shall be subject to rules governing normal promotion. Such cases shall, therefore, be regulated under the provisions of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and instructions issued there under." Attention of the Circle is drawn to Department of Personnel and Training Om No. 22011/2/78-Estt. (A) dated 16.02.1979 communicated in DGP&T letter no.35-1/79-SPB-II dated 07.05.79. According to these orders, the penalty of censure or recovery of pecuniary loss are not a bar for penalty for promotion if the findings of the DPC are in favour of the employee. Similarly, the officials who were facing disciplinary action as one the date of actual due date of their upgradation can only be not considered.

3. The Circles are requested for bringing the above position to the notice of all Divisional Heads and concerned authorities for scrupulous observance and to avoid any grievance to the officials.

4. The limits for holding of Screening Committee as provided in Para 11 of this Directorate OM of even number dated 18.09.2009 may be strictly adhered to on concluding action of Scrutiny Committee ordered under letter of even number dated 01.09.2010.

5. This issues with the approval of competent Authority.

Sd/-

(Surender Kumar)

Assistant Director General (GDS/PCC)