Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal Mumbai Bench at Aurangabad
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 O.A. No. 139/2018 MAHARASHTRA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH AT AURANGABAD ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 139 OF 2018 (Subject – Benefit of Second A.C.P.S.) DISTRICT : OSMANABAD Popat s/o Dadarao Jadhav ) Age :60 years, Occu. Pensioner, ) R/o. Tuljapur, Tq. Tuljapur, ) Dist. Osmanabad. )….APPLICANT V E R S U S 1) The State of Maharashtra, ) Through: Secretary ) Revenue and Forest Department ) Government of Maharashtra ) Mantralaya, Mumbai. ) (copy to be served on C.P.O. ) M.A.T. at Aurangabad). ) 2) The Collector Osmanabad, ) Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad. )….RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPEARANCE : Shri Prashant Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant. : Shri M.S. Mahajan, Chief Presenting Officer for the Respondents. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : B.P. PATIL, MEMBER (J). DATE : 17.01.2019. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O R A L - O R D E R 1. The applicant has challenged the decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee (D.P.C.) headed by Respondent No.2 on 6.9.2017 and thereby refusing to grant the 2 O.A. No. 139/2018 second benefit of Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.) and also prayed to quash and set aside the said order and sought direction to the Respondents to grant second promotional pay- scale in view of the G.R. dated 1.7.2011 from the year 2009 onwards and to pay arrears thereof by filing the present Original Application. 2. The applicant was appointed as Clerk on the establishment of Respondent No.2 on 10.4.1985 and posted at Tahsil Office, Tuljpur. Accordingly, he joined his duty on 11.4.1985. On 11.08.2009, he was transferred from Tahasil Office, Tuljapur to Tahasil Office, Osmanabad on administrative ground. Thereafter, he came to be suspended on 20.7.2010. Thereafter, in the month of September, 2010 he filed an application for revocation of his suspension order. The Respondent No.2 got opinion of Tahsildar Osmanabad and submitted that the applicant had undergone by by-pass surgery and therefore, recommended to give him chance to serve. The Collector passed the order and revoked the suspension order of the applicant and accordingly he was reinstated in the service on 1.11.2010. Thereafter he filed an application dated 22.2.2011 with the Respondent No.2 requesting to treat his suspension period as duty period. On 1.11.2010, he filed the application to 3 O.A. No. 139/2018 allow him to join the service and also prayed to allow him to retire voluntarily. As per his request, he was permitted to take voluntary retirement and accordingly the applicant retired voluntary on 31.1.2011. 3. It is contention of the applicant that in view of the G.R. dated 1.10.1994, first time bound promotion has been given to him and promotional pay scale has been given to him w.e.f. 17.2.2001 in view of the order dated 30.7.2003 issued by the Respondent No.2 and thereafter, on 28.12.2009, he was regularly promoted on the post of Awal Karkoon (Revenue) Tahasil Office Osmanabad subject to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No.8452/2004. 4. It is contention of the applicant that after his regularization in the service, he filed several representations with the Respondent No.2 for granting second benefit of Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.). Thereafter, his case has been placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee. The Departmental Promotion Committee held meeting on 6.9.2017 and considered the case of the applicant and it refused to grant second benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.) on the ground that the applicant was not eligible as he retired before completion of 12 years service from the date of granting of 4 O.A. No. 139/2018 first benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. The applicant has approached this Tribunal being aggrieved by the said decision by filing Present Original Application. It is contention of the applicant that the impugned decision given by the Respondent No.2 is not in accordance with the G.R. and it is illegal and therefore he prayed to quash and set aside the said order and to grant promotional pay scale of the second benefit under Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.) and also prayed to direct the Respondent No.2 to grant the second promotional pay scale and to pay the arrears of the second promotion pay-scale to the applicant. 5. The Respondents have failed to file affidavit-in-reply inspite of ample opportunities given to them. 6. I have heard Shri Prashant Deshmukh, learned Advocate for the applicant and Shri M.S. Mahajan, learned Chief Presenting Officer for the Respondents. 7. Learned Advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant joined the service in the year of 1985. Thereafter, on 28.12.2009, he was regularly promoted on the post of Awal Karkoon (Revenue) Tahasil Office Osmanabad subject to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition 5 O.A. No. 139/2018 No.8452/2004 and thereafter, departmental enquiry has been initiated against him and he was suspended on 20.7.2010. The applicant had filed application for revocation of suspension order on the ground of his ill health. Therefore, the Respondent No.2 revoked the order of suspension and the departmental enquiry by order dated 24.11.2010. The applicant was reinstated in the service accordingly. 8. Learned Advocate for the applicant has further submitted that in the year 2003, the Respondent No.2 granted first time bound promotion to the applicant in view of the G.R. dated 1.10.1994 w.e.f. 17.2.2001. He has submitted that the applicant retired w.e.f. 31.1.2011. He has submitted that the applicant has completed 12 years’ service after getting first benefit of Time Bound Promotion and therefore, he is eligible for getting second benefit of Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.). But the Respondent No.2 had not properly considered his case and decided to not to grant second benefit under Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.) to the applicant and therefore, he prayed to quash and set aside the decision of the Respondent No.2 taken in the meeting of the D.P.C. held on 6.9.2017 and prayed to direct the Respondents to extend the second benefit under Assured career Progression Scheme 6 O.A. No. 139/2018 (A.C.P.S.) to the applicant and to direct the Respondent to pay arrears to the applicant by allowing the Original Application. 9. Learned C.P.O. for the Respondents has submitted that the Respondent No.2 granted first benefit of Time Bound Promotion to the applicant by the order dated 30.7.2003 w.e.f. 17.2.2001. Therefore, the applicant is eligible to get second benefit under A.C.P.S. after rendering 12 years continuous service from the date of first time benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. The applicant will be entitled to get second benefit on 17.2.2013, but prior to that, the applicant was retired on 31.1.2011 and therefore, he was no entitled to get second benefit under Assured career Progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.). Therefore, the Departmental Promotion Committee has rightly refused the said benefit of the applicant. He has submitted that the D.P.C. has recorded the reasons while rejecting the claim of the applicant and therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order. Therefore, he supported the decision of the Respondent No.2 in that regard. 10. Admittedly, the applicant received first Time Bound Promotion w.e.f. 17.2.2001 by order dated 30.7.2003 issued by the Respondent Nol.2 which is at page no.17 of paper book. The applicant retired from service w.e.f. 31.1.2011. He took 7 O.A. No. 139/2018 voluntary retirement. It means that he retired before completion of 12 years services from the date of grant of first benefit of Time Bound Promotion w.e.f. 17.2.2001. For claiming the second benefit of Assures Career progression Scheme (A.C.P.S.), the applicant has to render 12 years continuous service from the date of granting first benefit under A.C.P.S. In fact, in the instant case, the applicant has not rendered 12 years service from the date of first benefit of A.C.P.S. w.e.f. 17.2.2001. Before completion of 12 years service, he retired on 31.1.2011 and therefore, he was not eligible to get second benefit under A.C.P.S. The said fact has been considered in the meeting of the D.P.C. held on 6.9.2017. The reasons have been recorded accordingly, while refusing to grant the second benefit of A.C.P.S. to the applicant and it is evident from the minutes of the meeting of the D.P.C. (page nos. 20 to 24). 11. I found no illegality in the decision taken in the meeting of the D.P.C. The Respondent No.2 had rightly refused the claim of the applicant. Therefore, no interference is called for in the impugned decision of the D.P.C. There is no merit in the O.A. Therefore, the Original Application deserves to be dismissed. 8 O.A. No. 139/2018 12. In view of the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, the Original Application stands dismissed. No order as to costs.