In Brief
The Union of India challenged orders by High Courts and Administrative Tribunals granting government employees financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme at the grade pay of their next promotional post, rather than at the immediate next higher grade pay as specified in the Scheme itself. The Supreme Court held that the MACP Scheme, which superseded the earlier ACP Scheme, requires upgradation only to the immediate next grade pay in the pay band hierarchy—not to the promotional hierarchy. The Court rejected reliance on Raj Pal's case as binding precedent since that Special Leave Petition was dismissed on technical grounds without decision on merits. The Court upheld the Government's policy choice endorsed by the Sixth Pay Commission, noting courts must defer to expert bodies unless schemes are demonstrably arbitrary or unjust. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the High Court orders, though the Court recommended the Government review cadre structures to address implementation anomalies.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.