look news india
Amidst the ongoing discussions regarding the formation of the 8th Central Pay Commission (8th CPC) and pay matrix discrepancies, the Supreme Court of India has given a major and decisive verdict on a long dispute related to financial upgradation of central employees and railway personnel. The apex court has clarified that if an employee has received regular promotion within his cadre, even if his grade pay remains the same due to merger of posts in the pay commissions, he cannot be given a separate financial upgradation (such as GP 4600 or 4800) under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) scheme.
The court has also decided that no employee can claim financial upgradation by going above the prescribed pay ceiling of the highest promotional post in his cadre.
What was the whole controversy and how did the problem arise?
This dispute mainly started after the merger of pay scales in different cadres after the Sixth Pay Commission (6th CPC):
-
Example of Railway Guard Cadre: An employee joined the service as Goods Guard and was later promoted to Passenger Guard and then to Mail/Express Guard, the highest rank in the cadre.
-
Merger of pay scales: The Sixth Pay Commission merged all these posts of Guard Cadre into a single grade pay (₹4200/Pay Matrix Level-6).
-
Employees Claim: The employees’ contention was that due to non-increase in grade pay despite promotions, their actual financial status did not increase and hence, on 10, 20 and 30 years of service, they should get the next higher grade pay (₹4600 and ₹4800) under MACP.
-
Tribunal’s decision: CAT and the High Court had initially ruled in favor of the employees, against which the Central Government and the Railway Administration had filed an appeal in the Supreme Court.
3 main legal bases of the Supreme Court’s decision
The division bench of the Supreme Court, while accepting the appeal of the Central Government, interpreted the service rules and MACP guidelines:
-
1. Mandatory rule of Para-8: Para-8 of the MACPS Scheme clearly states that if regular promotion has been received even to posts carrying the same grade pay in a cadre, the same will be counted as financial upgradation in the calculation of MACP.
-
2. Promotion not limited to money only: The court said that promotion not only includes salary increase but also the selection process, discharge of higher responsibilities and seniority of the post.
-
3. Cadre ceiling not violated: Employees who have reached the last promotional post of their cadre cannot seek the benefit of MACP over and above the highest grade pay of that cadre.
Big relief to employees from recovery
In the decision, the Supreme Court has provided full protection on humanitarian grounds to those employees who had earlier received this financial benefit under the orders of the Tribunal or High Court. The court directed that the employees should be compensated on the basis of benefits already given. No Recovery However, the rules will be strictly followed for future cases.
Why is there a demand to remove this discrepancy in the 8th Pay Commission?
After this decision of the Supreme Court, central employee organizations and unions have started preparations to raise this issue on priority before the 8th Pay Commission.
The main demand of the employees is that the problem of ‘stagnation’ (stagnation in career) arising out of merger of posts in the 6th and 7th Pay Commission should be removed and the MACP should be reorganized on the basis of actual ‘Promotional Hierarchy’ instead of normal pay levels, so that the financial growth of the employees is not hampered even after years of service.