BABY MATHEW Vs. RUBBER BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these Writ Petitions are filed by employees of Rubber Board aggrieved by the withdrawal of the benefit granted to the petitioners under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme. The parties and documents referred to in this common judgment would be as described in W.P.(C) No.27732/2015, unless specified otherwise.

(2.) M/s Chandrika Devi and Suma George who are petitioners in WP(C) Nos.11531 and 27732 of 2015 respectively, joined the Rubber Board as LD Clerks on 26.04.1982 and 22.09.1982 respectively in the scale of pay of Rs.260-400 revised as 950-1500 (from 01.01.1986 in 4th CPC). It is stated that while the petitioners were working as LD Clerks, the Rubber Board introduced computerisation and for constituting new cadre which was later named as Electronic Data Processing (EDP) cadre, a notification dated 07.03.1986 was issued inviting applications for appointment to the post of Data Entry Machine Operators in the scale of pay of Rs.1,200-2,040. After undergoing a process of selection consisting of written test and interview, they were deputed for a computer course in April 1986, in M/s Pallavan Transport Consulting Services Ltd, Madras. The petitioners in both these cases along with 2 others were appointed as Data Entry Machine Operators in the scale of pay of Rs.1200-30-1560-EB-40--2040, as per Ext.P1 order dated 15.12.1986. It was ordered that they would be treated as Data Entry Machine Operators under training for one year. Their scale of pay was revised to 1350-2200 as per order dated 09.07.1990. As per order dated 30.09.1992 produced as Ext.P3 in W.P.(C).No.11531/2015, the 2nd respondent accorded sanction for revision of the scale of pay of the petitioners/the existing Data Entry Operators to 1400-40-1800-EB-50-2300. It was stated that the scale of pay of 1350-2200 sanctioned to the Data Entry Operators in 1990 was the one that was applicable to Data entry Operators under Grade B; in the light of the OM dated 11.09.1989 of the Ministry of Finance on rationalisation of pay scales of Electronic Data processing posts, the next promotional grade is as Data Entry Operator Grade C in 1400-2300; taking note of the strenuous nature of job, qualification and experience of the Data Entry Operators, the Rubber Board felt it necessary to offer the existing incumbents the next promotional grade C of Data Entry Operator in the scale of 1400-2300. The pay scale was later revised as 4500-7000 with effect from 01.01.1996 in the pay revision order. As per order dated 22.12.1999 (produced as Ext.P5 in W.P.(C).No.11531/2015) their posts were upgraded to grade D and accordingly their pay was revised to 5000- 8000 with effect from 01.11.1999. It is stated that Smt. Suma George was promoted as Computer Assistant in the scale of pay of Rs.5500-9000 as per order dated 26.08.2002. It is also stated that the scale of pay of 5000-8000 and 5500- 9000 were merged into pay band 2 in 9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4200, in the VI CPC. Government of India introduced Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) as per Ext.P3 memorandum dated 19.05.2009, with effect from 01.09.2008. It is stated that as per Ext.P5 order dated 30.04.2012, Smt.Suma George was granted financial upgradation under 3rd MACP in the pay band of 9300-3400 in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-. In the case of Chandrika Devi, the Rubber Board issued order dated 17.02.2012 (Ext.P6 in her case), granting her the 3rd financial upgradation under MACP in PB2 (9300-34800) with GP 4600/- with effect from 01.11.2009, on completion of ten years of service as Data Entry Machine Operator. It was stated that the financial upgradation was granted on the basis of the recommendations of the screening committee. It is stated that the post of Data Entry Machine Operator was re-designated as Data Entry Operator and thereafter as System Assistant as per order dated 05.12.2012.

(3.) Whileso, the audit party in its inspection raised objection to the benefit of MACPS granted to the petitioners as per its report dated 10.06.2014, produced as Ext.R2(a) by the 2nd respondent, stating that the 2nd respondent was considering the shift over to another channel based on departmental examination as direct entry post, disregarding the service rendered by them prior to their appointment in such posts. It was stated that when the service prior to their appointment to such posts is reckoned towards other benefits, that would also be regular service and promotions obtained at these levels are also promotion/upgradation under ACP. It was further stated that the intermediary steps for appointment cannot be considered as direct appointment since no open selection is involved in such appointment, giving opportunity to inside and outside candidates. In the case of Suma George, the objection was that she got three promotions/upgradations before granting ACP and that direct entry at a later stage in service cannot be considered for granting ACP. The 2nd respondent was directed to revise all such similar cases. It is stated that even though Rubber Board submitted its reply justifying their action submitting Ext.R2(b) explanation dated 05.01.2015, the audit wing did not accept the same. Thereupon, the Rubber Board issued Ext.P6 order dated 16.01.2015 withdrawing the benefit of MACP granted to the petitioners on the ground that audit did not accept its explanation. It was ordered to re-fix the pay as per the audit objection and to effect recovery of the payment made towards MACP. Consequent to this, their pay was re-fixed as per Ext.P7 order withdrawing the benefit of MACP.