Friday 31 August 2018


  1. I have filed the present Writ Petition on 05/07/2013 with the main relief of setting aside of the Judgement and Order NO. O.A.145 of 2013 dated 16/04/2013 of the Learned Central Administrative Tribunal, (CAT) Mumbai Bench at Mumbai, as it is not based on facts and law. It was admitted on 09-07-2014, and since then it is kept under ‘Unready” without any further date.
  2. Though the relief is sought by me as an individual, as a common issue, it is concerned with all Central and State Government employees who are covered by the Central Pay Commission Report as stated below:-
i.                    The reliefs sought from the CAT are as follows:
“In view of the facts mentioned in para 6 above the Applicant prays for the following reliefs:-
a).   Expunge and or nullify Para 9 of the Office Memorandum no.35034/3/2008- Estt.(D) dated 19/05/2009 issued by DOPT and declare the effective date of MACPS as 01/01/2006 as fixed by the Government Resolution mentioned herein above and various other legal provisions mentioned in para 6 (i) to (vii).
b).   Direct Respondent no. 2 to act upon the demand of the Applicant to grant him MACP w.e.f. 01/01/2006 within 1 month from the date of the final order
c).    Being a common issue, direct the 1st Respondent to issue necessary order intimating the order to various Ministries and to act upon it.
d).    Cost of this Application.”
3.  The CAT dismissed the Application with the following words:-
“16. We have already said that the MACP Scheme is not a part of pay but the same is definitely a financial benefit extended to the civilian employees of the Government of India.
17. Having regard to the discussions made above, the OA is dismissed. No costs.”
4.  I further state that, the Supreme Court took an opposite view that the MACP Scheme is a part and parcel of the Pay in a recent appeal case filed by the Union of India against the decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), [(2018) 11 SCC 99 Union Of India vs Balbir Singh Turn & Another], where also similar MACP Scheme is prevailing. The Court said (para 10), “We are only concerned with the interpretation of the Resolution of the Government which clearly states that the recommendations of 6th CPC as modified and accepted by the Central Government in so far as they relate to pay structure, pay scales, grade pay etc. will apply from 01.01.2006. There may be some gainers and some losers but the intention of the Government was clear that this Scheme which is part of the pay structure would apply from 01.01.2006. We may also point out that the Resolution dated 30.08.2008 whereby the recommendation of the Pay Commission has been accepted with modifications and recommendations with regard to pay structure, pay scales, grade pay etc. have been made applicable from 01.01.2006. This is a decision of the Cabinet. This decision could not have been modified by issuing executive instruction. The letter dated 30.05.2011 flies in the face of the Cabinet decision reflected in the Resolution dated 30.08.2008. Thus, administrative instruction dated 30.05.2011 is totally ultra vires the Resolution of the Government”. The only difference in this Supreme Court case and that of the Petitioner’s case is that of the date by which the Office Memorandum / Letter issued by D.O.P.T. for civil side and by Defence Ministry for Armed Forces i.e., 19-05-2009 & 30-05-2011 respectively. But in both these cases, modified implementation date of MACPS was the same 01/09/202008. This date was the subject matter under challenge before the CAT and now before this Hon’ble Court in the Writ Petition under consideration.
5. I also state that when the Union of India subsequently filed 2 more appeals on the same issue, the Supreme Court termed those cases as frivolous or infructuous cases and dismissed both of them by imposing heavy cost of Rs.1,00,000/-on the Appellants [Union of India & Ors. V. Pirthwi Singh & Ors. JT 2018 (4) SC 404], thereby fortifying its stand on the issue as decided in the first case that the MACP Scheme is a part and parcel of pay.
[Also read my book “a fraud in the Indian constitution” on corruption in public administration is ending with, "IS IT NOT BOTH CAG AND THE MINISTRY ARE FOOLING THE PARLIAMENT AND THUS THE PEOPLE OF INDIA? NOW IT IS FOR THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (PAC) OF THE PARLIAMENT TO TELL THE PUBLIC WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH THESE KINDS OF AUDIT OBJECTIONS AND REPLIES BROUGHT BEFORE THEM". It is written as a part of my autobiography. For more information and purchase go to link:  or (Ebook and Paperback is available)]

Sunday 12 August 2018


Government Staff Unions/Associations should not be mere sycophants of Executive Government but should stand always for the common benefit of members.

To start with the subject, I am quoting an observation of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench while dismissing my individual MACP case O.A. No.145/2013 dated 16-04-2013 (Appeal was admitted by Bombay High Court and pending before it for final hearing) :-

“ Para 11.             The applicant has also challenged the competence of D.O.P.T. to issue the OM declaring date of effect of M.A.C.P benefit. However, neither the staff side nor the Union ever raised this question before subjecting themselves to the Joint Meeting that DOPT did not have any authority to declare the date of effect of MACP Scheme.
Para 13.                ……. Moreover, it is evident from the minutes of meeting of the National Anomaly Committee that the Staff Side has been advised to reconsider their demand for giving effect to the MACP Scheme from 01.01.2006 in view of practical difficulties as mentioned in the Record Note of 17.7.2012”. And it was the end of the issue. (For details of my pending Appeal before the HC, go to my blog:

But now these same Unions and Staff Associations are trying to take credit for the implementation of the same in the Defence Ministry because some of the retired Army Jawans filed the same issue through their Armed Forces Tribunal and the Supreme Court. (In Civil side except me I do not know anybody else took up the matter). The Unions are now busy with sending demand letters to ministries etc. to implement the decisions of the Supreme Court as if it is achieved because of their effort. Such tricks were played by them in the past also. One such example is the demand to declare the periodical D.A. In the past, there was a ritual before the Parliament House at the starting of each Session. There would a Morcha and shouting slogans demanding D.A. and as normal, it would be declared. Then the celebrations for achieving the great demand. Even otherwise also it would be declared. But disappointing them, a later Pay Commission fixed the effective date of D.A. as 1st January and 1st July. So now that annual ceremony is discontinued.

[Also go through my following books, of which free part of e-book can be read without any payment:- 1- LTC RULES MADE EASY at:-  and 2- My autobiography detailing my crusade against corruption while in service titled: “A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION” at:- ]

Similarly, such an incident happened in my own case in CAG/IA&AD departmental case. When in CAG Office Accounts and Audit department was bifurcated into two, posts were not equally graded. Accounts were treated little below grade. Similar to this MACP case, then also I filed a case for equality. In that my personal as well as non-personal issues were also involved. One such issue was that in Account side, Supervisor post was retained whereas in Audit side it was not there. To frustrate my case, just before the final hearing, in Audit side also it was introduced. The file movements were known to the association members. Though the decision was not published, immediately they started demanding supervisor post in Audit side. And within one month the order was published. In the final hearing then I withdrew that claim for being already implemented. At that time many of my moral supporters told me to make an announcement in this regard in the form of a circular to counter the claim. Then my response was that my purpose is achieved. Then why should respond to such activities. As a result of the case being a general order, Junior Senior anomalies comparing with both the Accounts/Audit departments were also remedied, though I got minimum benefit because of my promotion. Only one simple individual benefit I got was arrears of Travelling Allowance based on my revised pay because that order was only applicable to me individually. All other benefits were common to all. The present MACP case also I made out as an individual and common case.

What I want to stress is that, Union or Association is good if working properly and for the benefit of employees. Otherwise, they work as a tail of Executive.

For full details of my publications – blogs, books, pages, etc. visit my home page: