The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has observed that the defence personnel, refusing to undergo the promotion cadre test, would not be entitled to periodic financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP).
The observation was recently made by Justice Shekhar Dhawan, Justice Sudhir Mittal, and Air Marshal Manvendra Singh, in reference to the grant of financial upgradations to Personnel Below Officers Rank (PBOR).
The Bench noted that financial up-gradation was to be given after 8, 16, and 24 years of service to break stagnation. However, if an individual was unwilling to undergo the promotion cadre test, showed unwillingness for promotion, or was involved in any disciplinary proceedings or case involving inefficiency, those matters were to be looked at separately by the competent authority.
Such individuals were not entitled to financial up-gradation as per the scheme of MACP, added the AFT members.
The Bench at Chandigarh was constituted last year on the orders of the AFT Chairperson in the case of one Chanchal Singh, who had joined the Army in 2002 and was invalidated from the force in 2019.
Though Singh had been granted the first MACP after eight years, the same was denied to him on completion of 16 years as he had submitted his unwillingness for the Promotion Cadre Course.
The counsel appearing for the Armyman argued that after the Cabinet in 2008 approved the grant of periodic benefits to the personnel under the MACP, no condition could have been imposed by way of executive instructions for the same.
The Centre, however, argued that when an individual himself refused promotion, he could not get the benefits of the financial up-gradation.
Considering the submissions, the AFT noted that MACP was introduced for the removal of obstructions to long stagnation in a career. The Bench noted that the financial upgradation was to be made after 8, 16, and 24 years, if an individual was not promoted in due course.
It further found that the scheme was subject to the conditions to be imposed by the Cadre Controlling Authority.
The Tribunal said the case regarding individuals refusing to undergo promotion cadre test or given unwillingness for promotion were to be dealt with as per the above instructions as issued as a policy decision of the Government of India itself and was conveyed vide Ministry of Defence letter dated 30.05.2011and that was subject to adherence to the Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2008-Estt. (D) dated May 19, 2009 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training).
The AFT also took into account the observations made by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs Manju Arora and Another, which said that if a regular promotion was offered but refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial up-gradation, she/he shall not be entitled to financial up-gradation only because she has suffered stagnation.
The Bench noted that the latest judgement from the Apex Court made it amply clear that financial up-gradation by way of MACP Scheme wasto be granted as per scheme approved by the Government of India but subject to the conditions imposed by the Cadre Controlling Authority.
The Cadre Controlling Authority had already clarified that the unwillingness to undergo a promotion cadre test and refusal for promotion and disciplinary proceedings against any individual was to be considered against him while considering the case for financial up-gradation for the grant of MACP after 8, 16, and 24 years of service.
Similarly, cases involving red ink entries and disciplinary proceedings are also looked into separately as per law/rules, it added.
The applicant was represented by Advocate SN Sharma (retired lieutenant colonel).
Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Jagjot Singh Lalli, Senior Panel Counsel KK Bheniwala and Senior Panel Counsel FS Virk appeared for the Union of India.