IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30808 of 2004(P)

1. C.PUSUSHOTHAMAN, (RETIRED HC/GD

... Petitioner

Vs
1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CISF

...

Respondent

2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE

3. THE COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT, CIAL, KOCHI.
For Petitioner :SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN
For Respondent :SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR, ADDL.CGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :02/11/2010
ORDER
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No.30808 of 2004
==================
Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2010

JUDGMENT

The petitioner was a Head Constable in the Central Industrial Security

Force. He availed of voluntary retirement on 1.6.2003. After retirement, by
Ext.P3 order, retirement benefits were granted to him.

In Ext.P3, the

amount of retiring/superannuation pension sanctioned to the petitioner was

Rs.2400/-. Other amounts viz., DCRG, commuted value of pension etc. were
also

fixed

on

that

basis.

Subsequently, by

Ext.P4,

the

petitioner's

retiring/superannuation pension was reduced to Rs.2297/-. Other retirement

benefits were also correspondingly reduced. Against the said reduction, the
petitioner filed Ext.P5 representation, which was rejected by Ext.P6 order,
holding that the reduction was necessitated because he had availed of the
benefits of Assured Career Progression (A.C.P) scheme, whereby, the
persons stagnating in a post are entitled to salary as applicable to the next
promotion post, without satisfying the conditions for eligibility for the said
benefits. In accordance with that scheme, persons who could not get normal
promotion during a stipulated period would be entitled to the scale of pay
applicable to the next promotion post, provided, they have the qualifications
prescribed for that promotion post. The petitioner's next promotion post was
that of Assistant Sub Inspector. For promotion to that post, successful
completion of the Promotion Cadre Course (PCC) was mandatory. Although
the petitioner was detailed for attending the Promotion Cadre Course, he did

not successfully complete the course and therefore, he was held not entitled
to the benefits of the A.C.P. Scheme. Consequently, his pay was reduced and
consequently, his pension, is the decision in Ext.P6. The petitioner is
challenging Exts.P4 and P6 seeking the following reliefs;
"(a)

Call for the records leading upto Ext.P7 and quash Ext.P6 and P4

orders by a writ of certiorari or any other writ direction or order.

(b)

Direct the respondents to grant all retirement benefits already

sanctioned as per Ext.P3.

(c)

Declare that the withdrawal of A.C.P. benefits already granted to

the petitioner is illegal."

2.

The contention of the petitioner is that it is not because of any fault

of the petitioner that he could not complete the Promotion Cadre Course. He
was detailed only once for undergoing the course and he attended the
course, but finding that he is not medically fit to undergo the Promotion
Cadre Course, he was removed from the course. The petitioner further
submits that all persons were granted four chances for successfully
completing the Promotion Cadre Course. Before the petitioner could avail of
four chances, he had retired on 1.6.2003 and, therefore, the A.C.P. benefits
already granted to the petitioner cannot be withdrawn on the ground that he
has not successfully completed the Promotion Cadre Course and also the
pension reduced based on the same, is the petitioner's contention.

3.

A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents taking the

stand that, for becoming eligible for the benefits of the A.C.P. Scheme, an
employee should have all the qualifications prescribed for the promotion
post, the scale of pay of which is given as A.C.P. benefit. They would submit
that as per Ext.R3(a) Rules, for Head Constables, for promotion as Assistant
Sub Inspector, the qualifications prescribed are as follows;
(ii) Promotion: From amongst the Head Constable (General Duty) and
Head Constable (Driver) who have completed 5 years regular service in the
rank being in medical category SHAPE-I and have

successfully completed

promotion cadre course of Asstt. Sub Inspector (Executive) prescribed by

Central Govt. from time to time.
NOTE-1- Selection will be made on the basis of service records.
NOTE-2- Vacancies shall be filled up from among Head Constable (General
Duty) and Head Constable (Driver) in the ratio of 5:1 in the absence of
suitable Head Constable(Driver) all vacancies shall be filled up from amongst
Head Constable (GD).
NOTE-3

Personnel who have completed the qualifying service and have

been selected on the basis of service record should successfully complete

promotion cadre course of Asstt. Sub Inspector
declared

fit for Promotion."

(Executive)

before

being

Since successful completion of the Promotion Cadre Course is a condition for

promotion of Assistant Sub Inspector, that condition is applicable for
becoming eligible for the benefits of A.C.P. Scheme also.
According to the respondents, the petitioner was detailed three times on
1.7.2002, 6.1.2003 and 12.5.2003 for undergoing the Promotion Cadre
Course, which the petitioner has not undergone, and before undergoing the
course, the petitioner opted for voluntary retirement. Therefore, the
petitioner is not entitled to the benefits of the A.C.P. Scheme. Consequently,
on retirement, his A.C.P. promotion had to be cancelled and resultantly, on
reduction of pay, his retirement benefits also had to be reduced accordingly,
is the contention raised.
4.
5.

I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

It has been established that for becoming eligible for the benefits

of the A.C.P. Scheme, an employee should have had all qualifications

prescribed for the regular promotion to the post, the scale of pay of which is
granted under the A.C.P. Scheme, to persons who did not get a chance to
get regular promotion. As is clear from Ext.R3(a), for promotion to the post
of Assistant Sub Inspector, successful completion of Promotion Cadre Course
is a condition. Therefore, automatically that condition should apply to the
A.C.P. promotion also. Admittedly, the petitioner has not successfully
completed the Promotion Cadre Course. As such, the petitioner is not

entitled to A.C.P. Promotion for want of successful competition of Promotion

Cadre Course.
6.

The next question that arises for consideration is, whether, if non-

completion of the Promotion Cadre Course is not because of any fault of the
petitioner, the petitioner can be denied the A.C.P. promotion. I am of opinion
that for A.C.P. promotion, all conditions for regular promotion are to be
satisfied, which includes successful completion of Promotion Cadre Course. It
is immaterial as to whether because of whose fault the petitioner could not
successfully complete the Promotion Cadre Course. The respondents would
further contend that for successful completion of the Promotion Cadre
Course, the petitioner should be in SHAPE I Medical category, which medical
category is fixed depending on various physical and mental conditions of the
persons aspiring for promotion. The petitioner was never in SHAPE I medical
condition, is the contention raised by the respondents. Whatever that be, it
is an admitted fact that the petitioner has not successfully completed the
Promotion Cadre Course, which is a condition precedent for becoming
eligible for the benefits of A.C.P. Scheme. Therefore, I do not find any
infirmity in the action of the respondents in cancelling the A.C.P. Scheme
promotion given to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not
successfully completed the Promotion Cadre Course. Consequently, the
A.C.P. promotion granted to the petitioner is liable to be cancelled and the
pay of the petitioner has to be reduced as also, retirement benefits

correspondingly. As such, there is nothing wrong in Exts.P4 and P6 orders.

However, in Ext.P6 it is stated that on refixation, the recovery of excess pay
paid to the petitioner has been made. If that is correct, I am of opinion that
the pay already given to the petitioner cannot be recovered. To that extent,
the petitioner is entitled to relief. Therefore, while upholding Exts.P4 and P6,
I direct the respondents not to recover the excess pay granted to the
petitioner on account of A.C.P. promotion, which has been cancelled.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

///True copy///