1 CGHC010283532019 2026:CGHC:31439 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6896 of 2019 Indal Prasad S/o - Shri Chouthey Prasad Aged About 60 Years R/o - Ward No. 23/25, Sheetla Mandir, Nahar Par, Camp-2, Behind Babulal Gupta039s House, Bhailai District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through The Director, Central Industrial Security Force (Ministry Of Home Affirs), 13-Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-3, District : New Delhi, Delhi 2 - The Inspector General (W/z), Central Industrial Security Force, Head Of- fice, West Area, Tanuja New Mumbai (Maharastra), District : Mumbai, Maha- rashtra 3 - The Inspector General , Central Industrial Security Force, Head Office Utai, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force, K.S.T.P.C. Korba (Pc.G), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Yugal Kishore Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Abhishek Banjare, CGC Hon’ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.07.23 16:56:39 +0530 2 “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respon- dent authorities to revise the pay scale of the petitioner by granting the benefits of 1st financial Up-gradation under ACP Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant arrears of pay and revise the pension and other retiral benefits, in accordance with law. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case in- cluding award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent-authori- ties to revise his pay scale by granting the benefit of the 1st Financial Upgradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999, along with consequential arrears of pay, revision of pension and other retiral benefits in accordance with law. It is, therefore, prayed that the respon- dents be directed to grant the benefit of the 1st Financial Upgradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999 along with all con- sequential monetary and retiral benefits, including arrears. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent–Union of In- dia submits that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the 1st Fi- nancial Upgradation under the ACP Scheme. It is contended that, as per the applicable rules and the ACP Scheme, an employee is required to fulfill all the prescribed eligibility conditions, including qualifying the departmental examination considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). It is submitted that the petitioner failed to qualify the said departmental examination and, therefore, did not fulfill the eligibil- ity criteria for grant of the benefit under the ACP Scheme. Conse- Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.07.23 16:56:27 +0530 3 quently, the respondents have rightly declined to extend the benefit of the 1st Financial Upgradation to the petitioner. 4. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 5. On perusal of the Counter affidavit that has been filed by the respon- dent, it is the specific stand of the respondents that since the petitioner had completed nearly 17 years of service in the same rank as on 09.08.1999, his case was duly considered by the Departmental Screening Committee/Departmental Promotion Committee held on 30.01.2002 for grant of the first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme. However, the petitioner was declared "Not Yet Fit" for grant of the said benefit as he failed in the prescribed outdoor test, as recorded in Battalion Service Order Part-I No. 06/2002 dated 11.04.2002. It is further stated that, in terms of the communication is- sued by the CISF Headquarters dated 15.09.2000, the requirement of qualifying the outdoor test/interview was applicable to those Consta- bles who became due for financial upgradation up to 03.02.2000. Since the petitioner failed to satisfy the prescribed eligibility criteria, he was not entitled to the benefit of the first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme with effect from 09.08.1999. 6. In view of above, this Court finds that the petitioner's claim for grant of the first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme was duly consid- ered by the competent Departmental Promotion Committee. However, the petitioner was declared "Not Yet Fit" on account of his failure to qualify the prescribed outdoor test. 7. In the absence of any material to demonstrate that the decision of the competent authority suffers from arbitrariness, illegality or perversity, and particularly when the petitioner has not filed any rejoinder to con- trovert the averments made in the counter affidavit, no ground is made out for interference by this Court. 8. Consequently, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ pe- tition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. However, it is observed 4 that if the petitioner qualifies the prescribed examination/test in future and otherwise fulfills the eligibility conditions under the applicable rules or the ACP Scheme, his case shall be considered by the competent au- thority in accordance with law. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Jyoti