Central Administrative Tribunal

Principal Bench
New Delhi

O.A.No.1455/2013

Order Reserved on: 08.05.2014
Order pronounced on 15.05.2014

Honble Shri V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J)

P.K.Chaturvedi
S/o Late Dr. D.D.Chaturvedi
Aged about 58 years
Resident of 161, DDA Flats,
Sector-1, Dwarka
New Delhi 110 075. Applicant

(By Advocate: Sh. C. Bheemanna)

Versus

Chairman Executive Committee of
Central Board of Trustees (EPF) & The Secretary
Ministry of Labour & Employment
Shram Shakti Bhawan
Rafi Marg
New Delhi 110 001.

Central Provident Fund Commissioner
EmployeesProvident Fund Organization
Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan
14, Bhikaji Cama Place
New Delhi 110 066. Respondents

(By Advocate: Ms. Aparna Bhat)

O R D E R


The present OA has been filed questioning the impugned Annexure-A1 dated 20.02.2013 of the
2nd Respondent EmployeesProvident Fund Organization (in short `EPFO) in not reckoning the date of
initial appointment of the applicant on deputation, i.e., w.e.f. 14.05.2001, for considering his case for
grant of the financial upgradation benefit under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (in
short, MACP).

2. Briefly stated the applicant while working as Lt. Colonel in the Indian Army was appointed as
Chief Engineer in the scale of pay of Rs.14300-400-18300, in the office of 2nd Respondent - EPFO, on
transfer on deputation w.e.f. 14.05.2001, vide Office Order dated 21.05.2001.

3. The applicant retired from the Indian Army w.e.f. 18.11.2004 and vide Office Order dated
17.11.2004 (Annexure `A to the reply filed by the respondents), the applicant was permanently
absorbed in the 2nd Respondent EPFO on reemployment basis, on expiry of deputation terms of
employment.

4. Since the applicant originally appointed as Chief Engineer on deputation in the 2nd Respondents
Organization w.e.f. 14.05.2001, and that the period of 10 years service required for the purpose of
granting the 1st Financial Upgradation benefit, under the MACP Scheme has been completed w.e.f.
14.05.2011, the applicant preferred representations, and the same were finally rejected by the
respondents stating that he was reemployed in the organization w.e.f. 19.11.2004, and hence, he would
be eligible for the said benefit only w.e.f. 19.11.2014.

5. The respondents while rejecting the claim of the applicant vide the impugned Annexure A1
dated 20.02.2013, observed as follows:
The matter has been examined in consultation with the audit wing of the organization. In this
regard, the DoP&T instructions are as follows:-

O.M.No.35043/3/2008-Estt(D) dated 19.05.2009, Ministry of Personnel and Public Grievances and
Pension. The para 3 of the above OM clearly depicts that ACP claim is applicable to all regularly
appointed Group A, B and C Central government civilian employees except officers of the organized
Group A services.

Para 9 of Annexure (1) of the above OM says that Regular Service of the purpose of MACPs shall
commence from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade on a regular basis either on direct
recruitment basis or on absorption or on re-employment basis. Service render on adhoc/contract basis
before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not be taken into reckoning.

It has also been observed that the said officer had joined EPFO on regular basis w.e.f. 19.11.2004.
Accordingly, the eligibility for the MACP benefits arises w.e.f. 19.11.2014 i.e. on the completion of 10
years regular service.

6. Heard Sh. C. Bheemanna, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Aparna Bhat, learned
counsel for the respondents, and have perused the pleadings available on record.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as per para 9 of the MACP Scheme,
dated 19.05.2009, read with the clarification issued at point No.5 of the OM dated 09.09.2010, his initial
date of deputation, i.e., 14.05.2001 should be taken into consideration for the purpose of reckoning the
period under the ACP Scheme. Further, the learned counsel would submit that the applicant was
permanently absorbed in EPFO but he was not reemployed and hence, the contention of the
respondents that he was reemployed is not correct.

8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the applicant earlier filed
OA No.2509/2012 (a copy of which is placed on record) with regard to his pay fixation and this Tribunal
while dismissing the said OA, declared that the applicant was absorbed in EPFO on reemployment basis
only, and hence, he cannot now re-agitate that he was not reemployed and therefore his initial date of
deputation has to be taken into consideration for reckoning the period under the MACP Scheme.

9. The applicant in his earlier OA 2509/2012, sought for the following reliefs:
(i) Hold, declare and direct that the applicant has been permanently absorbed in EPFO and that he
was not re-employed therein.

(ii) Hold, declare and direct that the applicant is entitled for the full pay and allowances admissible
for the post held by him in the office of Respondent No.3 without any deduction on account of the
pension received by the applicant for the service rendered by him in the Indian Army. Hold declare and
direct that the Central Civil Services (Fixation of pay of the re-employed Pensioners) Rules 1986 has no
application in the case of the applicant.

This Tribunal by its Order dated 16.04.2014 while dismissing the said OA categorically held that the
applicant was permanently absorbed in EPFO on reemployment basis but not on deputation.

10. In view of the said finding, the contention of the applicant that his initial date of deputation is to
be reckoned for the purpose of MACP is unsustainable. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for
the respondents, the applicant cannot re-agitate the issue once again in this OA.
11. In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the OA is devoid of any merit and
accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs.


(V. Ajay Kumar)
Member (J)

/nsnrvak/