UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS EX. HC/GD VIRENDER SINGH

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS EX. HC/GD VIRENDER SINGH


Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले


Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 1 of 28
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 16442 OF 2021)
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... APPELLANTS
VERSUS
EX. HC/GD VIRENDER SINGH ..... RESPONDENT
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 14322 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 16065 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.16179 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4279 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1592 OF 2021
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 19618 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1600 OF 2021
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 19905 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11603 OF 2020)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 2 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.12597 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11924 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11663 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1597 OF 2021
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13066 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11899 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 26590 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15702 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1603-1609 OF 2021
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 16220 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 17489 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11679 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12110 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12092 OF 2020)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 3 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11858 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3775 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4012 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4311 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4350 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4357 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4362 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4359 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4405 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4118 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4065 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4918 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4920 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 4 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4921 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4926 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4928 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4933 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4938 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4011 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4966 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4975 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4407 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3833 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4493 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 5031 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 5 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3830 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 5041 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4015 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5018 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 5916 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 5954 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5168 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4995 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 8333 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6057 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4972 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6082 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4934 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 6 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4993 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4598 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4924 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 4989 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 8463 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 5039 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4392 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 6848 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5075 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5086 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4033 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6031 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6094 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 7 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8726 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6694 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6440 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8727 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8722 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5750 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7392 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8723 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6858 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8724 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7553 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7960 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7136 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8683 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8700 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 8 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8725 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8936 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8728 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11738 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 10921 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7523 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4216 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5269 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3766 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 10923 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8126 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 10922 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8729 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8874 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11910 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 9 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11419 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15753 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12031 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15751 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15705 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15714 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15700 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15713 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11532 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15759 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11568 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11019 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11682 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 10 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11681 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11700 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15712 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12030 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11048 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15532 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15756 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15694 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11542 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 15697 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12495 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 15093 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13493 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 11 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 16411 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13803 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 18800 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 20257 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 307 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 42 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 26989 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 19129 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 370 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 491 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 381 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 959 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 377-378 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 932 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 19290 OF 2021)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 12 of 28
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8721 OF 2021)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2022
(DIARY NO. 19614 OF 2020)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6053-6054 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9796 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9797 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5580 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9795 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9704 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 7196 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9056 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9678 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8598 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12240 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12241 OF 2022)
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 13 of 28
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 561 OF 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13440 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13441 OF 2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9118 OF 2022)
J U D G M E N T
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
Delay is condoned and leave is granted.
2. These appeals by way of special leave raise three issues, all of
which are connected and relate to the Modified Assured Career
Progression Scheme1
, namely:
(a) Whether the MACP Scheme is applicable and to be
implemented with effect from 1
st January 2006, the date from
which the Central Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008
were enforced, or in terms of O.M. dated 19th May 2009 with
effect from 1st September 2009?
(b) Whether under the MACP Scheme the respondents are
entitled to financial upgradation equivalent to the pay
1 For short, the ‘MACP Scheme’.
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 14 of 28
scale/grade pay of the next promotional post in the hierarchy,
or the immediate next grade pay in the hierarchy of the pay
bands as stated in Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule to
the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008?
(c) Whether the respondents, who belong to the Central Armed
Police Forces, are entitled to grant of financial upgradation
under the MACP Scheme, if for administrative reasons they
were unable to fulfil the pre-proportional norms?
3. The second question is covered by a three Judge Bench decision
of this Court in Union of India and Others v. M.V. Mohanan Nair2
,
which judgment explicates the similarities and the difference
between the Assured Career Progression Scheme3
, the erstwhile
scheme which was replaced by the MACP Scheme. In a nutshell, it
can be stated that the MACP Scheme, like the ACP Scheme, is an
incentive scheme devised with the object of ensuring that the
employees who have stagnated for lack of adequate promotional
avenues are given benefit in the form of financial upgradation. The
financial upgradation is personal, does not amount to regular or
actual functional promotion, and does not require creation of a new
post. It has no relevance to the seniority position and principles of
2
(2020) 5 SCC 421
3 For short, the ‘ACP Scheme’
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 15 of 28
reservation are not applicable. Financial upgradation is granted to
only those employees who have not received actual or functional
promotion even after completion of the requisite service period,
though otherwise, they fulfil the prescribed conditions for
promotion4
. Having said so, the ACP Scheme and the MACP
Scheme differ significantly. Under the ACP Scheme, a government
servant is entitled to financial upgradation on completion of 12 and
24 years of her/his regular service, to the pay scale of the next
promotional post in the hierarchy. Under the MACP Scheme, an
employee is entitled to three financial upgradations on completion
of 10, 20 and 30 years of regular service to the next higher grade
pay in the hierarchy of the pay bands and grade pay as given in
Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule of the Central Civil Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
4. The difference between the two Schemes, and in the form of
financial upgradation, has been lucidly explained by this Court in
M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra) by observing that the MACP Scheme
has been implemented after due deliberation and on consideration
of the recommendations made by the Sixth Central Pay
Commission to bring systematic changes in the erstwhile ACP
4 For upgradation under the MACP Scheme, the benchmark of ‘good’ and ‘very good’ is applicable till
the grade pay of Rs.6600/- in pay band 3 and for grade pay of Rs.7600/- and above, respectively.
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 16 of 28
Scheme so that all employees, irrespective of the existing
hierarchical structure in their organisations/cadres, get identical
financial benefit of the next immediate grade pay instead of the
pay/grade pay applicable to the next promotional post. The MACP
Scheme puts an end and rectifies the problem arising from interdepartmental disparities in re the pay scales of the next promotional
post. The objective of the change is analysed and decoded in M.V.
Mohanan Nair (supra), in the following words:
“29...Under the MACP Scheme, financial upgradations
are granted at three regular intervals on completion of
10-20-30 years of service without promotion. Hence, it
is also intended to ensure that the employees are
adequately incentivised to work efficiently despite not
getting promotion for want of promotional avenue. The
change in policy brought about by supersession of the
ACP Scheme with the MACP Scheme is after welldeliberated and well-documented recommendations of
the Sixth Central Pay Commission. Considering the
various issues in the implementation of the ACP
Scheme, the Pay Commission expressed its views “the
only other way is to bring systematic changes in the
existing Scheme of ACP so that all the employees
irrespective of the existing hierarchy structure in their
organisations/cadres, get some benefit under it”. The
Commission therefore, recommended that the existing
scheme of ACP be continued with the modifications
indicated thereon in the report that the financial
upgradation has to be in the next immediate grade pay.
One of the reasons for the expert body recommending
the MACP Scheme was that there were interdepartmental disparities where several departments
had varying promotional hierarchies. As a result, the
working of ACP Scheme under which an employee who
stagnated for 12 years, was entitled to pay in the pay
scale of the next promotional post, led to interdepartmental anomalies. The Pay Commission
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 17 of 28
therefore, recommended MACP Scheme with a view to
putting an end to the problem ensuing from interdepartmental disparities.
30....By perusal of the MACP Scheme extracted earlier,
it is seen that the words used in the Scheme are
“placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in
the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands”.
The term “grade pay in the next promotional post” is
conspicuously absent in the entire body of the MACP
Scheme. The argument of the respondents that the
benefit of MACP Scheme is referable to the promotional
post, is dehors the MACP Scheme and cannot be
accepted. Though ACP and MACP Schemes are
intended to provide relief against stagnation, both the
schemes have different features. Pay scales under the
Sixth Pay Commission and the MACP Scheme are
stated to be more beneficial since it extends to the
employees with time intervals with higher pay bands
and various facilities which were not available under the
ACP Scheme including the three financial upgradations
in shorter time span. In any event, MACP Scheme has
not been challenged by the respondents. As rightly
contended by the learned ASG, the respondents cannot
be permitted to cherry-pick beneficial features from the
erstwhile ACP Scheme and also take advantage of the
beneficial features in the MACP Scheme.
31. The object behind the MACP Scheme is to provide
relief against the stagnation. If the arguments of the
respondents are to be accepted, they would be entitled
to be paid in accordance with the grade pay offered to
a promotee; but yet not assume the responsibilities of a
promotee. As submitted on behalf of Union of India, if
the employees are entitled to enjoy grade pay in the
next promotional hierarchy, without the commensurate
responsibilities as a matter of routine, it would have an
adverse impact on the efficiency of administration.”
5. The judgment in M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra) defers to the Sixth
Central Pay Commission recommendations as an expert body that
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 18 of 28
had threadbare examined all the issues, disparities and even
representations by employees before making their proposal, which
thereafter upon careful consideration was accepted by the
government with modifications. The courts would not normally
interfere with well deliberated decisions by experts in the field,
unless adoption is bad on account of statutory violation, the policy
contravenes the overriding constitutional mandate of right to
equality, is discriminatory, manifestly arbitrary or negates other
fundamental rights. The Executive, by the Constitution, has been
conferred the right to choice as it has a duty to discharge, and is
responsible and accountable for their action. The court examines
the validity challenge, albeit, while performing the constitutional
duty and exercising the power of judicial review, does not substitute
its views on the choice of policy on merits. In fiscal matters,
including pay fixation and terms of service, several factors like
prevailing financial position, capacity to bear the additional liability
are relevant and, therefore, the courts do tread carefully as
interference may have serious impact on the public exchequer and
have grave financial implications.
6. In M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra), the argument to adopt “purposive
interpretation” or to apply the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’
for grant of financial upgradation to the pay in the next promotional
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 19 of 28
post as under the ACP Scheme, viz. financial upgradation to the
next grade pay in the hierarchical pay scale, was rejected as
financial upgradation cannot be equated with promotion. On merits,
it has been held that the financial upgradation envisaged as per the
MACP Scheme is not a case of hostile discrimination. The MACP
Scheme is not irrational, unjust and prejudicial to a section of the
employees, but a well-considered decision which has taken all
material and relevant factors into consideration. Prescription of pay
scales and incentives are a matter of decision taken by the
government which, when based upon the recommendation of an
expert body like the Central Pay Commission, should carry weight
and the courts should be reluctant to substitute the policy with their
own views on what would be more equitable and just. It is to be
noted that the MACP Scheme postulates grant of three financial
upgradations after a period of 10, 20 and 30 years, whereas the
ACP Scheme had postulated grant of only two financial
upgradations after a period of 12 and 24 years of regular service.
Thus, the claim for grant of financial upgradation in the grade pay
of the promotional hierarchy was rejected. Further, with effect from
1
st September 2008, the ACP Scheme stands superseded by the
MACP Scheme as a matter of government policy and hence, the
employees, on and from the date of implementation of the MACP
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 20 of 28
Scheme, cannot claim any benefit of the ACP Scheme. To hold so,
this Court referred to the Joint Committee meetings held on 15th
September 2010, 15th March 2011 and 27th July 2012, which were
followed by a letter dated 4
th November 2013. Minutes of these
meetings reveal that some alternatives, including giving of
individual option to choose between the ACP Scheme and MACP
Scheme, were considered but not favoured as impracticable.
7. The first question has been answered by this Court in Union of
India v. R.K. Sharma and Others5
in the following words:
“8. Ms Madhavi Divan, learned Additional Solicitor
General of India appearing for the appellants submitted
that this Court in Balbir Singh Turn held that payment
under the ACPS is a part of the pay structure whereas
in a later judgment in Union of India v. M.V. Mohanan
Nair this Court was of the opinion that both ACP and
MACP Schemes are in the nature of incentive schemes.
These appeals deserve to be dismissed in terms of the
judgment of this Court in M.V. Mohanan Nair. The
contention of the appellant is that a policy decision was
taken to implement the recommendation of the 5th Pay
Commission in respect of revised scales of pay and
dearness allowance for civilian employees with effect
from 1-1-2006 and that revised allowance other than
dearness allowance with effect from 1-9-2008. The
learned Additional Solicitor General argued that the
respondent is entitled to the incentive under the ACP
Scheme which was in vogue till 31-8-2008. The
respondent cannot seek applicability of MACPS with
effect from 1-1-2006. According to the MACPS the
financial upgradation is in the higher grade pay in the
same pay band whereas financial upgradation as per
the ACP Scheme was to the next grade pay of
5
(2021) 5 SCC 579
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 21 of 28
promotional post. The learned Additional Solicitor
General stated that revision of financial upgradation
granted to civilian officers by implementing MACPS
from 1-1-2006 would be detrimental to the respondent
and other similarly situated persons as huge amounts
of money would have to be recovered from them.
9. For a better understanding of the dispute in these
cases, it is necessary to examine the judgments of this
Court in Balbir Singh Turn and M.V. Mohanan Nair. The
point that was considered by this Court in Balbir Singh
Turn relates to the applicability of the benefit of MACPS
from 1-1-2006. The respondents therein approached
the Armed Forces Tribunal which held that the benefit
of ACP granted to an employee is part of the pay
structure which affects the pay and also his pension.
The Armed Forces Tribunal held that an ACP is not an
allowance but a part of pay and therefore, in terms of
the government resolution, the employees were entitled
for MACP with effect from 1-1-2006. This Court in Balbir
Singh Turn upheld the said finding recorded by the
Armed Forces Tribunal. Instructions issued on 30-5-
2011 were found to be contrary to the Resolution dated
30-8-2008 as, according to the resolution 1-1-2006 was
the effective date for implementation of MACPS in
matters relating to pay and dearness allowance.
10. In M.V. Mohanan Nair a three-Judge Bench of this
Court considered the ACPS as well as the MACPS to
hold that the schemes are in the nature of incentive
schemes which were brought into force to relieve
stagnation. This Court was of the considered view that
the respondents therein were entitled only to the benefit
of next grade pay in the pay band and not to the benefit
of grade pay of next promotional post. As the MACPS
is a matter of government policy pursuant to the
recommendations made by the Pay Commission, this
Court refused to accept submissions of the employees
that MACPS should be made applicable with effect from
1-1-2006.
11. In view of the judgment of this Court in M.V.
Mohanan Nair, the respondents and other similarly
situated employees are entitled for financial
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 22 of 28
upgradation under MACPS only to the next grade pay
and not to the grade pay of next promotional post. It is
clear from the Resolution dated 30-8-2008 that the
recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission was
accepted by the Government and was made effective
from 1-1-2006 in respect of civilian employees with
regard to revised scales of pay and dearness
allowances. Insofar as the revised allowances other
than dearness allowance, recommendations of the 6th
Pay Commission were given effect from 1-9-2008. The
judgment in M.V. Mohanan Nair clinches the issue.
Benefits flowing from ACP and MACP Schemes are
incentives and are not part of pay. The Resolution dated
29-8-2008 is made effective from 1-9-2008 for
implementation of allowances other than pay and DA
which includes financial upgradation under ACP and
MACP Schemes. Therefore, the respondents and other
similarly situated officers are not entitled to seek
implementation of the benefits of MACPS with effect
from 1-1-2006 according to the Resolution dated 29-8-
2008. Moreover, the implementation of MACPS by
granting financial upgradation only to the next grade
pay in the pay band and not granting pay of the next
promotional post with effect from 1-1-2006 would be
detrimental to a large number of employees, particularly
those who have retired. We find force in the submission
made by the learned Additional Solicitor General that
uniform implementation of MACPS for civilian
employees with effect from 1-1-2006 would result in
large-scale recoveries of amounts paid in excess.”
8. The aforesaid paragraphs refer to the decision by a three Judge
Bench of this Court in M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra), which we have
quoted and referred to above. It also refers to a two Judge Bench
decision in the case of Union of India and Others v. Balbir Singh
Turn and Another,
6 which holds that notwithstanding O.M. dated
6
(2018) 11 SCC 99
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 23 of 28
19th May 2009 stating that the MACP Scheme would be applicable
with effect from 1st September 2008, the MACP Scheme would be
applicable with effect from 1st January 2006. The judgment in Balbir
Singh Turn (supra) reasons that the Central Government, on 30th
August 2008, had resolved to accept the recommendations of the
Sixth Central Pay Commission with regard to the personnel below
the officer rank, subject to certain modifications. Reliance was
placed upon clause (i) of the Resolution of the Central Government
dated 30th August 2008, which reads as under:
“(i) Implementation of the revised pay structure of pay
bands and grade pay, as well as pension, with effect
from 1-1-2006 and revised rates of allowances (except
dearness allowance/relief) with effect from 1-9-2008;”
It also refers to clause (ix) of the Resolution which reads as follows:
“(ix) Grant of 3 ACP upgradations after 8, 16 and 24
years of service to PBORs;”
Thereafter, the judgment in Balbir Singh Turn (supra) says
that the Sixth Central Pay Commission had recommended grant of
benefit of the ACP Scheme after 10 and 20 years of service, but the
Central Government had decided to grant ACP Scheme after 8, 16
and 24 years of service. Lastly, it holds that perusal of clause (i) of
the Resolution dated 30th August 2008 indicates that the Central
Government had decided to implement the revised pay scales of
pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension, with effect from 1st
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 24 of 28
January 2006. The second part of the said clause lays down that all
allowances, except dearness allowance/relief, will be effective from
1
st September 2008. The MACP Scheme, being a part of the pay
structure and having effect on the grade pay of the employees,
cannot be said to be part of allowances. Benefit of MACP Scheme,
if given to employees, would affect their pension and thereby also
means that it has to be applied and given effect from 1st January
2006 as it is a part of the pay structure.
9. As rightly held in R.K. Sharma (supra), the aforesaid reasoning
given in the case of Balbir Singh Turn (supra), in our opinion, has
not been accepted by the three Judge Bench decision in the case
of M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra), which in clear terms holds grant of
financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme is not a matter of
pay structure, but an incentive scheme brought into force to relieve
stagnation which operates on its own terms. We may add that the
pay scales are fixed and revised by the rules which are enacted in
exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 and
clause (5) of Article 148 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, vide
Notification dated 29th August 2008, the Central Civil Services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 were enacted vide G.S.R. No. 622(E).
Rule 1(2) states that the Rules, as enacted, shall be deemed to
have come into force on 1st January 2006. The aforesaid Rules
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 25 of 28
neither postulate nor have any provision for grant of financial
upgradation under the MACP Scheme. It is to be further noted, and
it is an accepted position of both parties, that the MACP Scheme,
as implemented, postulates grant of financial upgradation after 10,
20 and 30 years of regular service and not after 8, 16 or 24 years
of regular service, as was originally envisaged in terms of
Government Resolution dated 30th August 2008, or for that matter,
10 or 20 years of service, as was recommended by the Sixth
Central Pay Commission. In our opinion, the Resolution of the
Central Government dated 30th August 2008 cannot be read as
conferring any right on the government employees. The resolution
was not notified and enforced to confer a legal right.7 The Office
Memorandum dated 19.05.2009 promulgates and operationalises
the MACP Scheme with effect from 01.09.2008. The Office
Memorandum states that financial upgradations as per the
provisions of the earlier ACP Scheme would be granted till
30.08.2008. Further, past cases would not be re-opened and the
difference in pay scales on account of grant of financial upgradation
under the old ACP Scheme and the MACP Scheme shall not be
construed as an anomaly.
7 See – Bachhittar Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, AIR 1963 SC 395, State of Assam Etc. v.
Kripanath Sarma and Others Etc., AIR 1967 SC 459, and other cases on the aspect of when an
order/resolution would confer a legal right. It is to be noted that the doctrine of legitimate expectation
has not been invoked and has no application in the facts of this case.
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 26 of 28
10. Learned counsel for the government employees, inspite of being
correct that M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra) does not refer to Balbir
Singh Turn (supra) and does not overrule it specifically, misses the
point that the entire ratio and reasoning given in M.V. Mohanan
Nair (supra), as rightly observed in R.K. Sharma (supra), cannot
be reconciled with the ratio in Balbir Singh Turn (supra). M.V.
Mohanan Nair (supra) has examined the MACP Scheme in depth
and detail to settle the controversy, inter alia holding that
supersession of the ACP Scheme by the MACP Scheme is a matter
of government policy, and that “after accepting the recommendation
of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the ACP Scheme was
withdrawn and the same was superseded by the MACP Scheme
with effect from 1.9.2008.”8 The ACP Scheme and MACP Schemes
were held to be in the nature of incentive schemes to relieve
stagnation and not as a part of pay structure, which had revised the
pay and the dearness allowance with effect from 1.1.2006. In these
circumstances, we do not think a case for reference to a larger
Bench of three Judges to reconsider the ratio in the decision of R.K.
Sharma (supra) is made out. Therefore, we reject the contention of
the learned counsel for the respondents/government employees for
reference of the matter.
8 See paragraph no. 32 in M.V. Mohanan Nair (supra) as reported in (2020) 5 SCC 421.
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 27 of 28
11. On the third aspect, we should record the concession rightly made
by the Additional Solicitor General during the course of the hearing
that the personnel working in the Central Armed Forces would be
granted financial benefit under the MACP Scheme on completion
of prescribed years of regular service by relaxation in cases where,
on account of administrative or other reasons, they could not be
sent for participation in pre-promotional course. The appellantUnion of India has agreed to accept the directions given by the Delhi
High Court in the case of Ram Avtar Sharma v. Director General
of Border Security Force9
in this regard. A liberal, pragmatic and
ameliorative approach is required to succour genuine grievances of
the personnel doing duty for the nation, owing to which they forgo
participation in pre-promotional courses. Accordingly, the third
question is answered against the appellant-Union of India.
12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeals filed by the Union
of India are partly allowed and impugned judgments, to the extent
they hold that the MACP Scheme applies with effect from 1.1.2006
and that under the MACP Scheme the employees are entitled to
financial upgradation equivalent to the next promotional post, are
set aside. MACP Scheme is applicable with effect from 1.9.2008
9 W.P. (c) No. 5278 of 2013 decided on 12th August 2014
Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 16442 of 2021 & Ors. Page 28 of 28
and as per the MACP Scheme, the entitlement is to financial
upgradation equivalent to the immediate next grade pay in the
hierarchy of the pay bands as stated in Section 1, Part A of the First
Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
The third issue, which relates to the fulfilment of pre-promotional
norms for grant of financial upgradation, is decided against the
appellant-Union of India to the extent that this would not be insisted
in the case of the Central Armed Forces personnel where, for
administrative or other reasons, they could not be sent or undergo
the pre-promotional course.
All pending applications are disposed of.
......................................J.
(SANJIV KHANNA)
......................................J.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI)
NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 22, 2022.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

100 Questions on Indian Constitution for UPSC 2020 Pre Exam

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर