The Delhi High Court has held that employees who have already received a higher Grade Pay through promotion, restructuring, or any other mechanism are not entitled to further benefits under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme.

A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain clarified that the MACP Scheme is designed exclusively to provide relief to employees who have faced career stagnation, i.e., those who continue in the same Grade Pay for 10, 20, or 30 years without any progression.

“The foundational premise of the MACP Scheme is stagnation. Once an employee has already advanced to a higher Grade Pay, that premise disappears. The Scheme does not envisage granting further benefits to those who have already moved up the Grade Pay ladder,” the Bench observed.

The Court was hearing cross-petitions—one filed by Central Government employees challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order that denied them MACP benefits on the ground of prior upgradation, and another filed by the Union Government contesting a separate CAT decision which had allowed MACP benefits to similarly placed employees.

Dismissing the employees’ plea, the Bench reiterated that the purpose of the MACP Scheme is to provide periodical financial upgradation to those who have remained static in a particular pay grade for long durations, not to confer double benefits on those who have already received advancement.

It further noted that the employees’ placement in HS Grade-I after restructuring was not a mere re-designation but an actual upgradation in Grade Pay based on seniority. Ignoring this fact to extend MACP benefits would run contrary to the intent of the scheme.

“Any advancement to a higher Grade Pay—whether termed as promotion, financial upgradation, or restructuring—must be counted while determining eligibility under the MACP Scheme,” the judgment stated.

Concluding that the employees’ progression already amounted to financial advancement, the Court held they were not entitled to additional MACP benefits. Accordingly, the Bench set aside the CAT order which had granted them such relief and upheld the Union Government’s position.

Cause Title: Union of India & Ors. v. Satyvir Singh & Ors. & Other Connected Matters