UNION OF INDIA Vs. SHETHIA KAMLESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned counsel Mr. Shakeel A. Qureshi for the petitioners. The respondents were working as Accounts Clerk cum Typist (for short 'ACT') in different Nehru Yuvak Kendra Sangathan (for short 'NYKS') in different districts in the State of Gujarat. The respondents were serving for long period and some of them were even working for more than 24 years but they have not got any benefit of promotion. The Central Government has introduced a policy of Assured Carrier Progression (for short 'ACP') Scheme and the respondents became entitled to get benefit twice during their service carried. The first benefit was to be given on completion of 12 years of service and second benefit was to be given after completion of 24 years. The payscale of the respondents were also revised following the recommendations of Central Pay Commission and payscale of ACT was fixed at Rs.4,000 � Rs.6,000/ from the existing scale of Rs.1,200 � 2,040/ and scale of Junior Accounts Officer was fixed at Rs.5,500 � 9,000/ from the existing scale of Rs.1,640 �

(2.) ,900/, which was the next promotional scale of pay of ACT. 2. The ACTs were granted next higher scale on awarding of ACP benefits of ACP1 and ACP2 respectively in the year 2003. The benefits given to ACTs after 12 years and 24 years were withdrawn by orders dated 19/05/2008, 04/06/2008 and 16/01/2009. All the three orders, as aforesaid, passed by the appellants were challenged by the respondents before the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in Original Application (for short 'O.A.') No. 148 of 2009. The Tribunal has allowed the said O.A. by judgment dated 08/03/2011 relying upon the judgments of the Tribunal of Cuttak Bench in O.A. No. 83 of 2009 (Indrajit Patel and Others Vs. Union of India and Others) and order dated 15/07/2010, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, wherein, the view taken by the Tribunal that the respondents are entitled for the benefits, was upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, wherein, the Punjab and Haryana High Court in its judgment dated 15/12/2010 passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 22313 of 2010. The Tribunal has relied on the earlier judgments and has accepted the scheme of respondents by reiterating the judgments of the Tribunal given by the Chandigarh and Cuttak Bench. We do not find any illegality in the order of the Tribunal, this petition is devoid of any merits and is accordingly dismissed.