CHAIRMAN RUBBER BOARD Vs. SUMA GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of three writ appeals preferred by the Rubber Board against the common judgment of the Single Bench dtd. 13/2/2020, whereby the writ petitions, challenging the action of the Rubber Board in recovering the amount allegedly and erroneously paid under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) by granting the third up-gradation, have been allowed and the impugned order has been quashed.

(2.) All respondents/writ petitioners were appointed as Lower Divisional Clerks and Statistical Assistants having a pay scale of Rs.1400.002300 as per the 4th Central Pay Commission. Recruitment Rules for the post of Computer Programmer, Exhibit R1(b), envisaged that the selection is on the basis of test and training and the method of recruitment was promotion. The categories of posts from which promotion can be made was on the basis of a departmental test to determine aptitude followed by training on computer application and evaluation of performance with a condition that the employees eligible must possess a minimum educational qualification of pass in S.S.L.C. or equivalent course. The whole controversy revolves around the recruitment rules where against column No.5 of 'method of recruitment', expression 'promotion' has been referred to. If at all it had been a promotion, there would have been a seniority list of the Statistical Assistants or Lower Divisional Clerks but, in fact the said rule meant only for the employees of the Rubber Board to avail the chance of selection on the basis of the test and training.

(3.) All the employees, on the basis of the aforementioned rule, were appointed as Computer Programmer and Data Entry Machine Operators, having different pay scale. Thereafter, all the aforementioned posts merged together with effect from 1/4/1991 as 'Programmer cum Processing Assistant' in the pay scale of Rs.2000.003200 as per 4th Central Pay Commission, which were later revised from time to time. The department granted them the 3 rd MACP with effect from on 15/2/2002 as they had put in ten(10) years of stagnated service. The question which arose for withdrawing the aforementioned benefit was on the basis of an audit objection, that recruitment as Computer Programmer or Data Entry Operator was the first upgradation and not an appointment by selection and re-designation as Programmer cum Processing Assistant was second upgradation. With effect from February 2002, on recommendation of 5th Central Pay Commission, were placed in the pay scale of Rs.8000.00 13500 under the cadre review scheme, which was to be considered as third upgradation. Realizing the aforementioned factum, notice was issued for recovery of the excess amount, which was challenged before the single bench. Learned Single bench, on analysis of the evidence, allowed the writ petition.