Employees Cannot Claim ACP Benefits After Refusing Promotions, Court Rules
In a significant judgment, the Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to reject the claim of a petitioner, Samarpita Paul, for financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. The court, comprising Justices Parth Prateem Sahu and Sachin Singh Rajput, ruled that an employee who voluntarily refuses a promotion cannot subsequently claim financial benefits under the ACP Scheme.
The case stemmed from Samarpita Paul's contention that despite completing over 24 years of unblemished service, she was denied financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme merely because she had refused promotions on multiple occasions due to personal reasons. Her plea for senior scale/time-bound pay scale was previously rejected by the CAT, Jabalpur Bench.
The court emphasized that the ACP Scheme is designed to address stagnation in cases where no promotional avenues are available, not to reward those who choose to forgo promotions. The ruling highlighted the doctrine of "Approbate and Reprobate," which prevents employees from rejecting promotions while simultaneously seeking benefits intended for those without promotional opportunities.
The court noted that the petitioner was offered promotions in 2002, 2005, 2006, and 2010 but declined each time. It supported the respondents' argument that financial upgradation cannot be claimed if promotions are refused, as per a clarification from the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti in 2010. This clarification states that employees who decline promotions are not entitled to senior scale benefits upon completing the qualifying service period.
The petitioner also argued discrimination, citing cases where other employees, despite declining promotions, received benefits. The court, however, found no merit in this claim, pointing out that any incorrect benefits granted were rectified following the clarification.
The court relied on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in "Union of India v. Manju Arora," asserting that employees who refuse promotions cannot later claim financial upgradation benefits. It concluded that the CAT's decision was based on relevant material and did not warrant interference.
The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to the intended purpose of the ACP Scheme and clarifies that personal reasons for refusing promotions do not justify claims for financial benefits under the scheme.
Bottom line:-
Refusal of promotion bars entitlement to financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. The doctrine of "Approbate and Reprobate" applies, barring an employee from refusing promotion and simultaneously claiming benefits under the ACP Scheme.
Statutory provision(s): Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme, Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Samarpita Paul v. Union of India, (Chhattisgarh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2933107
