Refusal to take promotion cadre test disentitles military personnel from financial upgradation: Armed Forces Tribunal

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) recently held that the refusal to undergo promotion cadre test disentitles defence personnel from the periodic financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP) [Chanchal Singh v. Union of India and Others]..Justice Shekhar Dhawan, Justice Sudhir Mittal and Air Marshal Manvendra Singh gave the ruling on a reference to decide the controversy related to grant of financial upgradations to Personnel Below Officers Rank (PBOR)."Financial up- gradation is to be given after 8, 16 and 24 years of service to break stagnation but if an individual gives unwillingness to undergo promotion cadre test or unwillingness for promotion or he is involved in any disciplinary proceedings or case involving inefficiency those are to be looked at separately by the competent authority and they were not entitled to financial up-gradation as per scheme of MACP," the AFT members said in the decision..The bench at Chandigarh was constituted last year on the orders of AFT Chairperson in the case of one Chanchal Singh, who had joined the Army in 2002 and was invalidated out from the force in 2019. Though he had been granted the Ist MACP after eight years, the same was denied to him on completion of 16 years as he had submitted his unwillingness for Promotion Cadre Course.Singh's counsel argued that after the Cabinet in 2008 had approved the grant of periodic benefits to the personnel under the MACP, no condition could have been imposed by way of executive instructions for the same.However, the Centre argued that when individual himself refuses for promotion, he could not get the benefits of the financial up-gradation..Considering the submissions, the AFT noted that MACP was introduced for removal of obstructions for long stagnation in career and that it was made clear that the financial upgradation was to be made after 8, 16 and 24 years if an individual is not promoted in due course.It further found that the scheme was subject to the conditions to be imposed by the Cadre Controlling Authority. "The case regarding individuals refusing to undergo promotion cadre test or given unwillingness for promotion were to be dealt with as per above instructions as issued as policy decision of Government of India itself and was conveyed vide Ministry of Defence letter dated 30.05.2011and that was subject to adherence to the Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2008-Estt. (D) dated 19.05.2009 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training)," the tribunal said. .The AFT also took into account the observations made by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Manju Arora and Another that "if a regular promotion is offered but is refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial up-gradation, she/he shall not be entitled to financial up-gradation only because she has suffered stagnation"."The latest judgement from Hon’ble Supreme Court makes it amply clear that financial up-gradation by way of MACP Scheme were to be granted as per scheme approved by the Government of India but subject to the conditions imposed by the Cadre Controlling Authority and the Cadre Controlling Authority had already clarified that unwillingness to undergo promotion cadre test and refusal for promotion and disciplinary proceedings against any individuals are to be considered against him while considering the case for financial up-gradation for grant of MACP after 8, 16 and 24 years of service," the tribunal said..Thus, in the present case, the AFT in the judgment dated May 30 decided the reference against the petitioner since he had submitted his unwillingness for Promotion Cadre Course."Resultantly, the present reference is decided against the applicant to the extent that if financial up-gradation is to be given after 8, 16 and 24 years to break stagnation but if an individual refuses promotion or to undergo promotion cadre test, his case shall not be considered as financial stagnation for grant of MACP purpose and his case is to be dealt with separately. Similarly, cases involving red ink entries and disciplinary proceedings are also looked into separately as per law/rules," it ruled..Advocate SN Sharma (retired lieutenant colonel) appeared for the Army personnel (applicant). Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Jagjot Singh Lalli, Senior Panel Counsel KK Bheniwala and Senior Panel Counsel FS Virk represented the Union of India..[Read Order]