MACPS Anomalies with illustrations

MACPS Anomalies – reg.

For quite some time, NFIR had been receiving representations from the Railway employees who are being denied the benefit of MACPS even where there have been genuine difficulties/problems. One such case, with detailed illustrations, was forwarded to the Railway Board by NFIR vide letter No.IV/MACPS/09/Pt.II dated 11/08/2010 but there has been no response. A copy of the letter is enclosed for reference.

2. While mentioning an identical case, relevant condition vide Item no.25 of Annexure to Board’s letter dated 10th June 2009, is reproduced below:-

“25 If a regular promotion has been offered but was refused by the employee before becoming entitled to a financial upgradation, no financial upgradation shall be allowed as such an employee has not been stagnated due to lack of opportunities. If, however, financial upgradation has been allowed due to stagnation and the employee subsequently, refuses the promotion, it shall not be a ground to withdraw the financial upgradation. He shall, however, not be eligible to be considered for further upgradation till he agrees to be considered for promotion again and the second or the next financial upgradation shall also be deferred to the extent of period of debarment due to refusal.”

3. The above clearly implies that if an employee refuses the regular promotion before being entitled for a financial upgradation, no financial upgradation is allowed. This negative sentence is causing undue hardship to the staff for no fault. In this connection, an illustration is given below:-

“Employee `A’ was appointed on 20/12/1972. He earned two promotions one as Clerk Grade-I on 23/02/1980 and 2nd as Section Officer on 23/06/1982. Subsequently, he appeared for Group ‘B’ gazetted selection against 70% quota. He was found suitable and consequently he was empanelled and promoted as AAO and transferred out in 1995 itself. The employee `A’ could not carry out promotion due to personal reasons. Since the year 1995, the employee is in the same scale/Grade Pay and has been denied 3rd financial upgradation under the MACPS quoting item 25 of the Annexure to Board’s letter dated 10th June 2009.”

4.0 Evidently, the employee has been in service without a promotion much after over 10 years service as on 23/06/1982 i.e. much before the introduction of ACP Scheme i.e. from 01/10/1999. It is also worth-mentioning that the employee had declined promotion to Group `B’ Gazetted in the year 1995 and did not avail the financial benefit under ACP Scheme at all. Therefore, it would be unfair now to deny him 3rd financial upgradation, to which he is otherwise eligible, even after putting in service in excess of 10 years. It is also felt that there might be more cases of similar nature over the entire Indian Railways system.

The NFIR, therefore, requests the Railway Board to look into the above cases, and extend benefit of MACPS to such employees. If still doubt persists the case be apprised to DOP & T and clearance obtained for extending the benefit.