Rama Nand and Ors. vs Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

6 August 2020

Case No.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5829-5830 of 2012

Result

Dismissed

Bench

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose

Citation

[2020] 6 S.C.R. 19 : 2020 INSC 481

Headnote

Service Law:

Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme – Entitlement – To Telephone Operators who were sought to be deployed as Radio Telephone Operators (RTOs) in the higher pay as per re-organisation Scheme – Held: The consequence of re-organisation Scheme was re-description of post based on higher pay-scale and specialized training – This would amount to promotion – Hence not entitled to ACP.

Dismissing the appeals, the Court

HELD: 1. The consequence of reorganisation of the cadre resulted in not only a mere re-description of the post but also a much higher pay scale being granted to the appellants based on an element of selection criteria. There was a requirement of a minimum 5 years of service. Thus, all Telephone Operators would not automatically be eligible for the new post. Undoubtedly, the financial emoluments, are much higher. The appellants had also to go through the rigours of a specialised training. All these cannot be stated to be only an exercise of merely re-description or reorganisation of the cadre. Promotion may include an advancement to a higher pay scale without moving to a different post. In the present case, there is a re-description of the post based on higher pay scale and a specialised training. It is not a case, where the higher pay scale is available to everyone who satisfies the eligibility condition without undergoing any process of selection. The training and the benchmark of 5 years of service itself involve an element of selection process. Similarly, it is not as if the requirement is only a minimum of 5 years of service by itself. [Para 17][27-B-E-]

2. The complete factual contours of the difference between the two posts would have to be examined in the given factual situation and the triple criteria of minimum 5 years of service, a specialised training and much higher financial emoluments leaves no doubt. What was done has to be considered as a promotion disentitling the appellants to the benefits of the ACP Scheme. As the very objective of the ACP Scheme is “to deal with the problem of genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the employees due to lack of adequate promotional avenues.” [Para 18][27-F]

3. The benefits of ACP Scheme cannot be held applicable to the appellants and consequently the High Court was right in interfering with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal. [Para 16][26-H]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. 1. The appellants were all working as Telephone Operators with the Delhi Fire Service (“DFS”). On account of reorganisation of the wireless communication system, ninety-six posts of Radio Telephone Operators were sought to be created in terms of a letter dated 29.8.1983. NCT OF DELHI & ANR. [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.] Six Radio Operators were already operating as such, while twenty-seven Telephone Operators, in the pay scale of Rs. 260-400 were sought to be deployed as Radio Telephone Operators (“RTOs”) in a higher pay scale. Th

View Subscription Plans →