The Supreme Court ruled that an employee who declines a regular promotion offer are not entitled to the financial upgradation benefits as per the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions' office memorandum issued in August 1999. The Supreme Court made the statement while hearing a case in which some employees claimed to be eligible for the Assured Career Progression Scheme for Central Government Civilian Employees, which was established under an office memorandum signed on August 9, 1999.
The Assured Career Progression scheme provided for financial upgradation to the next higher grade of pay for employees who could not get promoted after 12 years of service, and the second upgradation is similarly admissible after 24 years of service, according to a bench of R S Reddy and Justice Hrishikesh Roy.
According to the bench, when a staff declines a promotion, issues in filling the higher position may occur, causing administrative problems because the employee in question frequently resists promotion in order to stay at his or her current job.
"Consequently, it is declared that the employees who have refused the offer of regular promotion are disentitled to the financial upgradation benefits envisaged under the office memorandum dated August 9, 1999," the apex court said.
The bench noted that two of the employees, who had been appointed as senior translators (Hindi), had been offered regular promotions to the higher position of translation officer (Hindi), but had declined on personal grounds.
The benefits under the Assured Career Progression scheme were given to them in November 1999 but when it was found that those were wrongly granted, they were withdrawn in 2002.
The Central Administrative Tribunal upheld the termination of three employees' Assured Career Progression benefits, citing both the office memorandums as evidence that they were not eligible to the improved pay tier under the scheme.