Rajasthan High Court Upholds Tribunal's Decision on MACP Entitlement

Court dismisses petition against financial upgradation, emphasizing employer's responsibility to maintain APARs

In a significant judgment delivered on November 6, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Sports Authority of India challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench. The Tribunal had earlier granted R.S. Rathore, a government employee, entitlement to the 2nd Financial Upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme. The High Court's decision underscored the employer's duty to maintain Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs) and found no merit in denying the financial benefits due to their non-availability.

The dispute originated from Rathore's claim for financial upgradation after completing 20 years of service, a provision under the MACP Scheme which came into effect on September 1, 2008. According to the scheme, employees are eligible for three financial upgrades after 10, 20, and 30 years of continuous service. Rathore, who joined as an 'Assistant' and was later promoted to 'Superintendent' and 'Assistant Director,' argued that his promotions did not affect his eligibility under the MACP Scheme due to a merger of pay scales under the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC).

The Sports Authority of India contested Rathore's claim, stating that his APARs were unavailable and he had already been promoted twice. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of Rathore, citing the merger of pay scales under the 6th CPC, which did not count as a promotion, thus entitling him to the 2nd Financial Upgradation. The Tribunal also emphasized that the responsibility to maintain APARs lies with the employer, referencing judgments from various High Courts and Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) guidelines.

Upon review, the Rajasthan High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision. The bench, comprising Justices Vinit Kumar Mathur and Bipin Gupta, confirmed that the merger of pay scales negated the argument of multiple promotions, thus validating Rathore's entitlement to the financial benefit. The court rejected the petitioner's argument about APARs, reiterating the employer's exclusive responsibility for their maintenance and emphasizing that an employee cannot be deprived of benefits due to the employer's failure to maintain records.

The judgment reinforces legal precedents regarding employer obligations under service law and the MACP Scheme. The ruling is a reminder of the protective measures in place for employees against administrative lapses and sets a precedent for similar cases nationwide.

Bottom Line:

Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme - Entitlement to financial upgradation despite non-availability of APARs - Employer cannot deny benefit on ground of non-maintenance of APARs, as the duty to maintain APARs lies with the employer.

Statutory provision(s): Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme, 6th Central Pay Commission, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) guidelines on APARs.

Sport Authority of India v. R. S. Rathore, (Rajasthan)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2808385