UNION OF INDIA Vs. N. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the Union of India, who is aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal which granted the third Modified Assured Career Progression to the applicant in the original application.

(2.) Sri.T.V.Vinu, learned Central Government Counsel would submit that the order of the Tribunal lacks clarity. It is also submitted that the applicant had been given three promotions in his career; from the post of Labourer 'B' and to Ordinary Grade Civilian Motor Driver (CMD) and then CMD Grade II and Grade-I. The cadre of CMD had only two grades which was later made three and the post of CMD Grade-II to which the applicant was initially appointed was renamed as ordinary grade. There were two higher grades, Grade-II and Grade-I. The applicant was hence posted as CMD Grade-II again on 1.8.1993 which was actually a promotion from the post of ordinary grade. Later on 8.11.1996, he was also promoted as CMD Grade-I. In such circumstances, he had three financial up-gradations by way of promotion and hence was disentitled from the benefit of the third up-gradation under MACP Scheme, since any employee getting three financial upgradations are so disentitled. It is also submitted that the applicant had never a case for MACP and the representation was also for promotion to the single post of CMD Special Grade which was occupied by one person senior and younger to the applicant who continued till the retirement of the applicant. The applicant retired on 31.10.2009. The claim for MACP was first made in the original application.

(3.) Advocate Smt.Ummul Fida appearing for the applicant in the original application submits that the applicant's claim before the authority was for promotion and on its rejection, an original application was filed seeking such promotion or in the alternate an MACP which he was entitled to. It was also submitted that the initial appointment to CMD Grade-II was not in the nature of a promotion from the post of Labourer 'B' and was an open selection.