UOI Vs. SH. CHATTARSAL SEHRAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged the order dated 27th January, 2009 passed in CP No. 456/2008 in OA No. 73/2004 discharging the contempt notice and affording another opportunity to the petitioners to implement the order dated 29th November, 2004 passed in OA No.73/2004, wherein the petitioners were directed to reckon the training period as eligible period for the benefits under ACP Scheme and to pass a speaking and reasoned order within a period of three months. The order of the Tribunal has primarily been challenged on behalf of the petitioners on the grounds, which were enumerated by the learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sinha, during the arguments on 5th September, 2011. The pleas raised on behalf of the petitioners are as under:-

(2.) BRIEF facts to comprehend the disputes are that the respondents had filed an original application seeking the quashing of the order dated 25th August, 2003 as well as a declaration that the action of the petitioners in denying the arrears of pay to the respondents is illegal and arbitrary and to further direct the petitioners to treat the revised dates of holding the each grade as the actual date of holding the each grade for all purposes and consequently to grant the benefits under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme) along with the actual arrears which had been denied in pursuance of the order dated 25th August, 2003.

(3.) SINCE the seniority had been granted to the respondents, they further sought arrears as a consequence of the seniority and ante-dating of their promotion and also sought that the ante-dated promotion be treated as deemed date for qualifying the trade test. For the Assured Career Progression, it was contended that since, the seniority was accorded after taking into consideration the period of training, the said period should also be reckoned as eligibility period for grant of upgradation under the ACP Scheme.