IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1343/2018. Date of Decision: 22nd May, 2026. Jit Pal Vashistha. .....Petitioner Versus Union of India and Others ….Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Harish Dod, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Central Government Counsel. _____ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- 1. That the petitioner may very kindly and please be held entitled to the pay fixation and grade-pay as per the chart attached as Annexure P-16 with the present petition. 2. That the petitioner be granted the arrears of his pay fixation and grade-pay along with interest @ 12% with effect from 13.07.2009. 2. Insofar as relief No.1 is concerned, the specific claim being raised therein has been highlighted at Page 43 of the paper book, which is the new amended pro-forma for pay fixation on grant of modified ACP Scheme (2nd MACP). The document placed at page 43 is a document coming from the custody of the respondents. It is an admitted position that the present petitioner has been paid salary in terms of details 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 given at Sr. No.9 (Page 43). However, the claim of the petitioner is detailed against Sr. No.10 thereof. 3. Admittedly, in the case at hand, the petitioner had been appointed as a Master (Maths) in the Sainik School Sujanpur Tihra, Sujanpur, District Hamirpur, HP (R-4). It is further admitted that Assured Career Progression Scheme was introduced in Sainik School from 07.12.2004. Under the ACP Scheme, first financial upgradation was to be granted on the completion of 12 years. In the case of the petitioner, 12 years were completed in July, 2001. On 13.07.2001, the petitioner had been granted a Senior Scale (higher promotional scale). In view thereof, when the ACP Scheme was introduced in Sainik School on 07.12.2004, the first upgradation was not given to the petitioner, as he had already been granted a Senior Scale (higher promotional scale) with effect from 13.07.2001. 4. The second upgradation in terms of the ACP scheme was to be given after 24 years. In the mean while the MACP Scheme was promulgated. The second upgradation in terms of the MACP Scheme was to be granted to the petitioner after having completed 20 years of service. In the case of the petitioner, entitlement for grant of MACP would have arisen with effect from 13.07.2009. The MACP Scheme in Sainik Schools was given effect from 01.09.2008, as is evident from the letter dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P-15 (4/T) page 36 of the paper book). 3 5. Request for grant of MACP, after having completed 20 years of service was made by the petitioner for the first time on 08.03.2011. A further request was made, vide Annexure P-9 (page 23) of the paper book, vide representation dated 02.09.2013. Response thereto exists at page 24 of the paper book (Annexure P-10). In the response so given on 06.09.2013, the petitioner was intimated that the implementation of MACP qua Sainik School was still under consideration, which as has been stated supra was finally implemented with effect from 01.09.2008.(letter dated 27.05.2015 Annexure P-15 (4/T) page 36 of the paper book). 6. The PCDA Chandigarh i.e. respondent No.2 recommended to fix the first ACP of the petitioner with 4800/- Grade Pay and the second MACP in pay band-2 with 5400/- Grade Pay. Accordingly, LAO(A) Shimla had requested the Principal Sainik School Sujanpur Tihra, Sujanpur District Hamirpur, HP (Respondent No.4) to examine the case. The said fact is evident from Annexure P-14 (page 31 of the paper book) i.e. letter dated 13.04.2017. 7. Learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure P-16 (page 37) of the paper book i.e. letter dated 11.07.2017, a communication inter -se the Principal of the Sainik School and Honorary Secretary of the Sainik School Society. A perusal wherefrom reflects that the issue of grant of MACP, as has 4 been claimed by the petitioner, was under active consideration inter-se the respondents. 8. It is in the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances that the petitioner filed the case at hand in May 2018. In response thereto, respondent No.1 has filed its reply. The justification for grant of second MACP in pay band- 2 with 5400/- Grade Pay, is as follows (relevant extract of Para-13 of the reply):- “The same case along with the pay fixation proformae on grant of 2nd MACP in the pay scale of 15600-39100 (GP- 6600) was prepared again and forwarded to the O/o the LAO (A), Shimla vide this school letter No. SSST/312/Accts dated 23, May 18 (Copy of the letter is annexed as (R-9). Subsequently, the said case was forwarded to PCDA (WC) by LAO (A), Shimla vide letter LAO/SML/SSST/Misc dated 31st May, 18 and PCDA (WC) vide its letter Pay/II/Tech/243/MACP dated 21st Aug, 18 (R-ED 10) intimated to the office of LAO (A), Shimla that the matter has been examined and this office is of the view the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands and grade pay as given in Section I, Part-A of the first schedule of the CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 as per Para 2 of Annexure-I to DoPT OM No.35034//2008-Estt (D) dated 19th May, 2009 i.e. PB-2 with Grade pay of Rs. 5400 and not PB-3 with Grade pay of Rs.6600 hence the service book and connected documents are returned herewith unaction. The same remarks of PCD (WC) has been 5 received by this office from LAO (A), Shimla vide letter LAO/SML/SSST/Misc dated 02nd September, 18 (R-11) and it is also advised to the school that all such type of cases may please be reviewed and action in this regard may please be taken accordingly.” For a better appreciation of the contention of the respondents, a reference can gainfully be made to Annexure R-5 appended with the reply at page 109 of the paper book, wherein in the case of a similarly situate employee, it has been mentioned that on initial appointment one Shri J.S. Thakur was granted the pay scale of 1640- 2900/. The said pay scale was revised to 6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996. The said Shri J.S. Thakur was granted the first ACP w.e.f. 21.06.2005 with higher promotional scale in the pay scale of 7500-12,000/-and the said pay scale is now to be revised to pay band-II with Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and not to Pay Band-III with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- as per Section I Part-A of the 1st Schedule of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008. 9. Heard counsels for the parties and perused the pleadings. 10. The aforesaid document, on the basis of which, petitioner is being denied higher grade pay has been placed on record along with rejoinder by the present petitioner as Annexure P-20(R) at page 169 of the paper book. From a perusal of the same specifically the 1st Schedule at Page-180 6 of the paper book, it is evident that Part-A Section 1 deals with the revised pay bands, grade pays for the post carrying present scales in Group “A” “B” “C” and “D” except posts for which different revised scales are notified separately. 11. Attention of the Court is also invited to page 185, a part of the same Annexure, wherein in Part-B Section II revised scales have been notified for certain specific categories. Therein at Item No.XVII revised scales for teachers have been provided. Attention whereof has been specifically invited to Column No.3, which pertains to Post Graduate Teachers under the Umbrella expression Teachers. Once different revised scales have been provided for in Part-B of Annexure P-20(R) a reference to Part-A Section I of Annexure P20(R) is futile. 12. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the revised scale w.e.f. 01.01.1996 is 6500-10500/-. In the promotional hierarchy next scale is 7500-12000/- and w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the pay scale is to be revised to Pay Band-3 with Grade pay of Rs.5400/-. As has already been stated (supra), the petitioner completed 12 years in July, 2001, however, first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme was not granted to the petitioner when the ACP Scheme was introduced in the Sainik School, on 07.12.2004, as the petitioner had already been granted Senior Scale (higher promotional scale) w.e.f. 13.07.2001. Thereafter, on completion of 20 years of service, 2nd MACP is due in the next scale 8000-13500/- (Pay Band-3) 7 with grade of Rs.6600/- in view of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 item XVII Sr. No.3 in Part-B Section II thereof at Page 185 of the writ paper book. 13. Other than the aforesaid, a similarly situate teacher like the petitioner has been granted grade pay of Rs.6600/-. The same is evident from Annexure P-12, specifically Sr. No.7(b) thereof. Hence, denying similar benefit to the petitioner is violative of Article 14 i.e. equality clause. Hence, on even this account, the petitioner is entitled to relief, as is being claimed. 14. Hence, for the forgoing reasons, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is held entitled for pay fixation w.e.f. 13.07.2009. Dues be paid to the petitioner within two months. If the needful is not done within two months, then the dues be paid with interest @ 6%. 15. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 22nd May, 2026 (Gaurav Rawat)