In all these appeals, almost all the High Courts have followed the Raj Pal and Ved Prakashs case and granted relief as prayed for by the respondents.
It was inter alia companytended by the appellants that the earlier ACP Scheme stood superseded by the MACP scheme and both the schemes cannot run companycurrently.
The SLP was filed on 24.12.2011 but some defects were observed by the Court Registry and returned for rectification whereafter the SLP was refiled only on 21.03.2013.
The OA was allowed and the appellants were directed to grant second financial upgradation in the promotional hierarchy in PB 2 in the scale of Rs.9300 34,800/ with Grade Pay of Rs.4,200/ to Raj Pal under the MACP from due date and fix his pay in the hierarchy of posts decided in his case earlier.
He claimed that he was entitled to be fixed in PB 2 in the scale of Rs.9300 34800/ with Grade Pay of Rs.
Raj Pal relied on para 6 of the MACP Scheme as per which in case of employees granted financial upgradations under ACP Scheme till 01.01.2006, their revised pay will be fixed with reference to the pay scale granted to them under ACP.
The relevant findings of the Tribunal in O.A. No.1038/CH/2010 read as under The respondents took the matter to Punjab and Haryana High Court by way of filing a CWP No.7356 CAT of 2005.
Raj Pal filed OA No.
The said writ petition was dismissed by the High Court.
2400/ .
1038/CH/2010 before CAT companytending that his pay has been wrongly fixed in PB 1 in the scale of Rs.5200 20200/ with Grade Pay of Rs.
BANUMATHI, J. Leave granted.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2020.03.05 The instant batch of appeals have been filed assailing the 144658 IST Reason orders of various High Courts dismissing petitions filed by the appellants, thereby upholding decisions rendered by different Benches of Central Administrative Tribunal granting financial upgradation of grade pay in the next promotional hierarchy by placing reliance upon Union of India and others v. Raj Pal and another CWP No.19387 of 2011 dated 19.10.2011.
The appellants filed CWP No.19387 of 2011 before the High Court assailing the aforesaid order.
4600/ .
by the Tribunal as well as the High Court in matters of grant of ACP and these pronouncements have attained finality and also stood implemented.
Being aggrieved, the appellant UOI has filed these appeals.
