O.A. No. 68 of 2016. Case: Raghesan Kadenkandy Vs The Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

Case NumberO.A. No. 68 of 2016
CounselFor Appellant:Ramesh C.R., Adv. and For Respondents: C.B. Sreekumar, Senior Panel Counsel
JudgesS.S. Satheesachandran, J. (Member (J)) and Vice Admiral M.P. Muralidharan, AVSM & BAR, NM, Member (A)
IssueService Law
Judgement DateDecember 13, 2016
CourtArmed Forces Tribunal


Vice Admiral M.P. Muralidharan, AVSM & BAR, NM, Member (A), (Regional Bench, Kochi)

  1. The Original Application is filed by Raghesan Kadenkandy, No. 9510901, Ex Hav/Instructor of AEC seeking the benefits of Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme.

  2. The applicant was enrolled in the Army Education Corps (AEC) as a Havildar/Education Instructor on 20 Aug 1989 and was discharged from service with effect from 31 Aug 2013 under the provisions of Army Rule 13(3)III(i) on completion of service of 24 years and 11 days.

  3. The submission of the applicant is that the Government had introduced Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme in August 2003 on recommendation of Vth Central Pay Commission, but benefit of the same was not extended to direct entry Havildars/Education Instructors. Subsequently, post VIth CPC, by Special Army Instruction No. 1/S/2008 dated 11 Oct 2008 revised pay structure of JCOs/NCOs and other ranks were promulgated with effect from 01 Jan 2006 (Annexure A3). Vide Para 15 of the said Special Army Instruction, ACP Scheme was revised with three financial upgradations after 8, 16 and 24 years of service, which was also made applicable to direct entry Havildars/JCOs. The applicant thus became eligible for the benefit of the revised Scheme. However, in May 2011, the Government introduced a Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) for Personnel Below Officer Rank superseding the previous ACP Scheme (Annexure A4). The Scheme was to be with effect from 01 Sept 2008 and financial upgradations under the earlier Vth CPC ACP Scheme, were to be granted till 31 Aug 2008. The applicant submitted that he was not given the benefits of the MACP Scheme as he had given an undertaking earlier forgoing Map Craft Course which was taken as refusal for promotion.

  4. Shri C.R. Ramesh, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that despite the earlier undertaking, the right of the applicant to receive benefits of MACP Scheme did not extinguish as the applicant did not get any opportunity of promotion till the date of his discharge as no vacancy occurred. Further, the MACP Scheme had not been promulgated when the applicant executed the undertaking to forgo the promotion course as the Scheme itself was introduced only by a letter of 30 May 2011. The learned counsel therefore prayed that any undertaking executed prior to the implementation of MACP Scheme should not adversely affect the claim of the applicant for the benefits of the Scheme. The learned counsel further submitted that similarly placed personnel had been granted the benefit of MACPS by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 73 of 2014 and connected cases (Annexure A5). Learned counsel also submitted that the applicant had made a representation to the respondents for the benefit of the Scheme (Annexure A6), but no response had been received from them.

  5. Respondents in their...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT