MACP on Promotional hierarchy – Hon’ble High Court dismisses Department’s Appeal against the CAT Judgement in favour of Employee to provide MACP in promotional hierarchy
MACP on Promotional hierarchy was directed to be granted by Principal CAT Delhi in its order in Appeal OA 864-2014 dated 12.03.2014 Now Hon’ble Delhi High Court has dismissed the department’s appeal against this CAT Order
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) 3608/2014NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH and TRAINING….. PetitionerThrough: Mr. Anand Nandan, Adv.versusOM PRAKASH and ORS ….. RespondentsThrough: None.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
O R D E R14.07.2014The petitioner/NCERT is aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter called CAT) dated 12 March, 2014 whereby the respondents? claim to be placed in the pay scale Rs. 9300-34800/- with grade pay of Rs. 5400/- was directed to be considered.The NCERT submits – his counsel argues- that the CAT fell into error in making the impugned directions at the first hearing. It was submitted that the CAT should not have directed the grant of relief once it was brought to its notice that the NCERT, on 26 November, 2013, had consciously considered and rejected the claim of higher pay scale.The impugned order of the CAT is premised upon the respondents? entitlement to the pay scale claimed by them which, in turn, was based on a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP 19387/2011. That judgment was not interfered with by the Supreme Court even though SLP (CC) 7467/2013 was preferred. The NCERT?s rejection of the respondents? claim for the higher pay scale appears to be solely based on the absence of any DOPT instructions pursuant to the Punjab High Court?s orders.Having regard to these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that since there is no direction to grant pay scale, the NCERT should pass a reasoned order indicating its reasons for denying the pay scale claimed by the respondents. In other words, its reasons cannot merely be absence of DOPT instructions, but have to be more substantial, upon application of mind to the judgments and directions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, as endorsed by the Supreme Court in its orders.
In view of the above, the impugned order does not call for any interference.
The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
VIPIN SANGHI, JJULY 14, 2014
source : Hon’ble Delhi High Court