All the PCsDA/PCA (Fys) Kolkata/CsDA
Subject: Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS): Clarification regarding grant of financial benefit to Hindi Officers.
The matter regarding grant of financial upgradation under MACP Scheme to those Hindi Officers, who have been initially appointed as Hindi Translators -grade II, after qualifying the Departmental examination, was referred to the Ministry for clarification as to whether, the appointment of such Hindi Translators is to be treated as fresh appointment or promotion, for grant of benefit under MACP Scheme.
DOP&T vide ID No. 61550/12/CR dated 14.11.2012 has now clarified that such appointment shall be treated as direct recruitment and past service/promotion will not be counted for the benefits under ACP/MACP Schemes, in terms of clarification point of doubt No.6 issued vide DOP&T F.No.35034/1/97-Estt (D) (Vol. IV) dated 10.2.2000 circulated under AN/XI/11051/ACP dated 17.2.2012.
All such cases may be dealt with accordingly.
CAREER PROGRESSION SCHEME FOR THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES –
directed to invite reference to the Department of Personnel and Training Office
Memorandum of even number dated August 9, 1999 regarding the Assured Career
Progression Scheme (ACPS). Consequent upon introduction of the Scheme, clarifications
have been sought by various Ministries/Departments about certain issues in
connection with implementation of the ACPS. The doubts raised by various
quarters have been duly examined and point-wise clarifications have accordingly
been indicated in the Annexure.
should strictly be implemented in keeping with the Department of Personnel and
Training Office Memorandum of even number dated August 9, 1999 read with the
aforesaid clarifications (Annexure). Cases where the ACP Scheme has
already been implemented shall be reviewed/rectified if the same are not found
to be in accordance with the scheme/clarifications.
Ministries/Departments may give wide circulation to these clarificatory
instructions for general guidance and appropriate action in the matter.
Memorandum No.35034/1/97-Estt(D)(Vol.IV) dated 10.2.2000]
Point of doubt
Two posts carrying
different pay scales constituting two rungs in a hierarchy have now been
placed in the same pay-scale as a result of rationalisaton of pay-scales.
This has resulted into change in the hierarchy in as much as two posts which
constituted feeder and promotion grades in the pre-merged scenario have
become one grade. The position may be clarified further by way of the
following illustration: prior to the implementation of the Fifth Central Pay
Commission recommendation, two categories of posts were in the pay-scales of
Rs.1200-1800 and Rs.1320-2040 respectively; the latter being promotion post
for the former. Both the posts have now been placed in the pay-scale of
Rs.4000-6000. How the benefits of the ACP Scheme is to be allowed in such
Since the benefits
of upgradation under ACP Scheme (ACPS) are to be allowed in the existing
hierarchy, the mobility under ACPS shall be in the hierarchy existing after
merger of pay-scales by ignoring the promotion. An employee who got promoted
from lower pay-scale to higher pay-scale as a result of promotion before
merger of pay-scales shall be entitled for upgradation under ACPS ignoring
the said promotion as otherwise he would be placed in a disadvantageous
position vis-à-vis the fresh entrant in the merged grade.
Some employees have
been allowed selection grade/in-situ promotions though these grades are not a
part of the defined hierarchy. Whether this is to be considered as promotion
for the purpose of ACPS? Also, what will be the situation if selection grade
has been allowed in lieu of higher pay-scale?
Mobility under ACPS
is to be allowed in the ‘existing hierarchy’. As such, if any selection
grade/in-situ promotion has been allowed to employees which is not a part of
the hierarchy, it shall not be counted as promotion for the purpose of ACPS.
For illustration sake, junior engineers of CPWD appointed in the grade
Rs.5000-8000/- are allowed the scale of Rs.5500-9000/- on completion of five
years of regular service and the scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- on completion of
fifteen years of regular service. The scale of Rs.5500-9000/- is not a part
of the defined hierarchy for them. In such cases, the pay-scale which is not
a part of the hierarchy may be treated to have been withdrawn. However, fall
in pay resulting out of this shall be protected by granting personal pay in
the aforesaid direct entry grade to be adjusted against future increments.
Moreover, as per Condition No.13 of ACPS, such existing (previous) schemes
would be discontinued with the adoption of ACPS. However, in the case of
common category of posts, the existing hierarchy in relation to a cadre would
mean the restructured grades recommended by the Fifth Central Pay Commission.
An isolated post of
Jeep Driver in the pay–scale of Rs.3050-4590 has been allowed in-situ
promotion in the grade of Rs.4000-6000 whereas as per Annexure-II of the O.M.
dated 9.8.1999 next scale is Rs.3200-4900. What should be the grade allowed
under ACPS? Similarly, Despatch Rider in the pre-revised pay-scale of
Rs.950-1400 and staff car driver in the pre-revised scale of Rs.950-1500 have
been allowed revised pay-scale of Rs.3050-4590. What should be the benefit
In such isolated
cases option should be either to follow the promotion scheme as formulated
vide DoP&T O.M No.22036/ 1/92-Estt(D) dated 30.11.1993 read with O.M
No.35034/3/97-Estt(D) dated 1.6.1998 or to grant benefits to the incumbents
of such isolated post on a dynamic basis as per Condition No.7 of ACPS.
In a case where a
person is appointed to a post on transfer (absorption) basis from another
post, whether 12 years and 24 years of service for the purpose of ACPS will
count from the initial appointment or otherwise.
The benefits under
ACPS are limited to higher pay scale and do not confer designation, duties
and responsibilities of the higher post. Hence, the basic criterion to allow
the higher pay scale under ACPS should be whether a person is working in the
same pay scale for the prescribed period of 12/24 years. Consequently, so
long as a person is in the same pay scale during the period in question, it
is immaterial whether he has been holding different posts in the same pay
scale. As such, if a Government servant has been appointed to another post in
the same pay scale either as a direct recruit or on absorption (transfer)
basis or first on deputation basis and later on absorbed (on transfer basis),
it should not make any difference for the purpose of ACPS so long as he is in
the same pay scale. In other words, past promotion as well as past regular
service in the same pay scale, even if it was on different posts for which
appointment was made by different methods like direct recruitment, absorption
(transfer)/ deputation, or at different places should be taken into account
for computing the prescribed period of service for the purpose of ACPS. Also,
in case of absorption (transfer)/deputation in the aforesaid situations,
promotions earned in the previous/present organisations, together with the
past regular service shall also count for the purpose of ACPS. However, if
the appointment is made to higher pay-scale either as on direct recruitment
or on absorption (transfer) basis or first on deputation basis and later on
absorbed (on transfer basis), such appointment shall be treated as direct recruitment
and past service/promotion shall not count for benefits under ACPS.
Needless to say, in
cases of transfer on administrative ground, involving only change of station
within the same department, the service rendered in the same grade at two
stations may count for ACPS, as such transfers are within the same
organisation, ordered generally for administrative/personal considerations
and the service rendered in the earlier station counts as eligibility service
Whether a Government
servant, who is direct recruit in one grade and subsequently joins another
post again as direct recruit, is eligible for first financial upgradation
under ACPS after completion of 12 years of service counted from the first
appointment or from the subsequent second appointment as direct recruit?
appointed initially on deputation to a post gets absorbed subsequently,
whether absorption may be termed as promotion or direct recruitment. What
will be the case if an employee on deputation holds a post in the same
pay-scale as that of the post held by him in the present cadre? Also, what
will be the situation if he was holding a post in the parent cadre carrying a
instructions on ACPS are applicable to the employees working in the
instrumentalities like autonomous/ judicial / statutory bodies? Similarly,
whether the orders are applicable to the employees working in industries
governed by certified standing orders, Factories Act and Industrial Disputes
ACPS is applicable
only to Central Government civilian employees and, as such, does not get
automatically extended to autonomous/statutory bodies. A conscious decision
in this regard shall have to be taken by the governing body/competent
authority/ organisation concerned. In relation to others, specific cases
shall be examined in consultation with the Department of Personnel and
Appointment on the
basis of limited departmental examination by which an employee joined a new
service should be treated as promotion or not. For example, in case of
Group-D employees appointed as LDCs or Grade-D stenographers appointed from
amongst LDCs should be treated as direct recruits or not in the respective
If the relevant
Recruitment Rules provide for filling up of vacancies of Stenographers Grade
‘D’/Junior Stenographers by direct recruitment, induction of LDCs to the
aforesaid grade through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination may be
treated as direct recruitment for the purpose of benefit under ACPS. However,
in such cases, service rendered in a lower pay-scale shall not be counted for
the purpose of benefit under ACPS. The case of Grade ‘D’ employees who become
LDCs on the basis of departmental examination stand on different footing. In
their case, relevant Recruitment Rules prescribe a promotion quota to be
filled up on the basis of departmental examination. Therefore, such
appointments shall be counted as promotion for the purpose of ACPS. In such
situations, past regular service shall also be counted for further benefits,
if any, under the Scheme.
A merged pre-revised
pay-scale of Rs.775-1150 was allowed to Group-D employees as a result of an
agreement with the Staff Side in the National Council of JCM. Those Group-D
employees drawing Rs.1030/- (pre-revised) or above as basic pay have been
allowed S-3 (revised) (Rs.2650-4000/-) and those drawing less have been
allowed S-2 (revised) (Rs.2610-3540/-). The replacement scales of
Rs.2610-3540/- and Rs.2650-4000 should be treated as one. Since S-4 (revised)
(Rs.2750-4400/-) does not operate in the Central Secretariat, Group ‘D’
employees should be given second upgradation in S-5 i.e. Rs.3050-4590/-.
The issue of
demerger of the integrated pay-scale of Rs.775-1150/- is already under
consideration of the National Anomaly Committee. It has not been agreed either
to treat the promotion to S-2 and S-3 as one or for merging the pay-scales.
As the merger of the pay-scales earlier was as a result of an agreement only
with a view to provide certain relief to the stagnating employees, it cannot,
in itself, be the ground for allowing additional benefits. As such, an
employee inducted in S-1 and now placed in S-2 shall be allowed one more
upgradation i.e. in S-3 under ACPS. An employee inducted in S-1 and now
placed in S-3 shall not be allowed any further upgradation as he has already
availed of two financial upgradations.
For isolated posts,
the scale of pay for ACPS as recommended by the Pay Commission may be
implemented and not the standard/ common pay-scales indicated vide
Annexure-II of the Office Memorandum dated August 9, 1999.
For isolated posts,
the scales of pay for ACPS shall be the same as those applicable for similar
posts in the same Ministry/ Department/Cadre except where the Pay Commission
has recommended specific pay-scales for mobility under ACPS. Such specific
cases may be examined by respective Ministries/ Departments in consultation
with the Department of Personnel and Training. In the case of remaining
isolated posts, the pay-scales contained in Annexure-II of the Office
Memorandum dated August 9, 1999 (ACPS) shall apply.
In the case of an
employee appointed on ad-hoc basis and who is subsequently regularised, the
ad-hoc service is counted towards increment. Whether the ad-hoc service may
be counted for the ACPS also?
No. In terms of para
3.2 of the Office Memorandum dated August 9, 1999 (ACPS), only regular
service which counts for the purpose of regular promotion in terms of
relevant Recruitment/Service Rules shall count for the purpose of upgradation
When an employee in
Group-C scale is given financial upgradation in Group-B scale, whether it
shall have the approval of the authority competent to appoint persons in the
While the Scheme
provides for only financial upgradations to an individual and not the
upgradation of the post held by him, the classification of the post held by
the officer should be with reference to the scale of pay of the post held by
Government servant on regular basis and not with reference to the higher
scale of pay granted to the Government servant on upgradation under ACPS.
However, upgradation under ACPS may be allowed with the approval of the
authority competent to make an appointment in the upgraded scales/grades.
ex-servicemen who have been re-employed after giving relaxation in age and
educational qualifications prescribed in relevant Recruitment/Service Rules
for particular post as direct recruit are to be allowed ACP benefits on
completion of 12/24 years of service after re-employment in civilian post?
Yes. The ACPS is
meant for the Central Government civilian employees. As such, ex-servicemen,
re-employed as civilian employee, shall be entitled for upgradation under the
Scheme on completion of 12/24 years of service after direct recruitment in
the civil employment. Also, such category of persons would already be drawing
pension on the basis of their service in the armed forces.
An employee gets
first promotion after 20 years of regular service. In terms of relevant
Recruitment/Service Rules, required eligibility service is 8 years for the
next promotion, whether upgradation under ACPS is to be allowed on completion
of 24 years of service from direct recruitment i.e four years after the first
promotion or on completion of 8 years of regular service after first
promotion as per the Recruitment Rules.
the scheme are to be allowed on completion of 12/24 years of service counted
from direct entry in the Government employment. If an employee gets first
regular promotion on completion of 20 years of service, he will be entitled
to second financial upgradation under ACPS on completion of 4 years of
service after such first regular promotion, though the Recruitment/Service
Rules prescribe higher length of regular service in the grade for next
An employee who may
have completed 29 years of service shall be entitled for two upgradations
directly along with other employee who may have completed 24 years of
service. This would create an anomaly in as much as 5 years of service of the
former would get neutralised. Therefore, the upgradation could be allowed
notionally from the date of completion of 12/24 years of regular service and
actual financial benefit could be given from the date of meeting of the
Since the Assured
Career Progression Scheme can have only prospective application, it is not
permissible to allow notional benefit with retrospective effect. This would
not lead to anomaly in as much as an employee having longer years of service
may get his pay fixed at a higher/same stage vis-à-vis an employee having
lesser length of service.
Recruitment/Service Rules prescribe departmental examination/skill test for
vacancy based promotion. However, this need not be insisted for upgradation
As per the scheme
(Condition No.6), all promotion norms have to be fulfilled for upgradation
under the Scheme. As such, no upgradation shall be allowed if an employee
fails to qualify departmental/skill test prescribed for the purpose of
An employee who has
completed 24 years of service is to be allowed two upgradations directly.
What will be the mode of fixation of pay of the employee?
illustration shall clarify the doubt: An incumbent in the pay-scale of
Rs.4000-6000/- (S-7) has put in 24 years of regular service without a regular
promotion. The incumbent shall be allowed two upgradations i.e. to S-8 and
S-9. His pay shall first be fixed in S-8 and then in S-9. Pay fixation
directly from S-7 to S-9 shall not be allowed.
If special pay has
been allowed in lieu of separate pay-scale, whether this should be treated as
promotion for the purpose of ACPS and also whether the special pay is to be
taken into account while fixing the pay under ACPS?
Special pay allowed
shall not be counted as promotion for the purpose of ACPS. Also, the special
pay drawn in the lower post, in lieu of a higher pay-scale shall be taken
into account for fixation of pay under ACPS subject to the fulfillment of the
following conditions as laid down vide Ministry of Finance Office Memorandum
No.6(1)-E.III(B)65) dated 25.2.1965, re-produced as Government’s decision
No.32 under Appendix-8 of FR/SR(Part-1) (Thirteenth Edition):-
(i)The special pay
in the lower post should have been granted in lieu of separate higher scale
(i.e. special pay granted to Steno-typist, Clerk-in-charge, etc.)
(ii)If the special
pay has been drawn in the lower post continuously for a minimum period of
three years on the date of promotion, the pay in the higher post will be
fixed under the normal rules, treating the special pay as part of the basic
pay. In other cases, the pay in the time-scale of the higher post will be
fixed under the normal rules, with reference to the basic pay drawn in the
lower post (excluding the special pay); where this results in drop in
emoluments the difference between the pay so fixed and the pay plus special
pay drawn in the lower post will be allowed in the form of personal pay to be
absorbed in future increases of pay.
(iii)In both kinds
of cases referred to in clause (ii) above, it should be certified that, but
for the promotion, the Government servant would have continued to draw the
special pay in the lower post.
Based on the
categorisation of Libraries, Ministry of Finance vide Office Memorandum No.
19(1)/IC/86 dated 24th July, 1990 have prescribed the following pay-scales
for posts in libraries:-
Library and Information
Assistant 1400-2600 5000-8000
Sr. Library and
Information Assistant 1640-2900 5500-9000
and Information Officer 2000-3500 6500-10500
Information Officer 3000-4500 10000-15200
and Information) 4500-5700 14300-18300
In number of cases,
depending on the work etc, there are only first two categories of posts in a
library. What should be the channel for upward mobility under ACPS of the
library staff in such cases?
In order to secure
uniformity in the upward mobility of the library staff under the ACPS, it has
been decided to adopt the aforesaid pay-scales prescribed by the Ministry of
Finance subject to the terms and conditions prescribed by them. Posts in the
library, if held in different nomenclatures, may, as such, also be
re-designated as per the said orders of the Ministry of Finance. However,
grant of higher pay-scale under ACPS will, as per Condition No.6, not result
in change in the designation etc of the beneficiary.
Point of doubt
On upgradation under
ACPS, pay of an employee shall be fixed under the provisions of FR 22(I)a(1).
Whether an option for fixation of pay in the higher grade based on the date
of increment may also be allowed?
Yes. The financial
benefit allowed under ACPS shall be final and no pay fixation benefit shall
accrue at the time of regular promotion. In other words, upgradation under
ACPS shall be treated on par with regular promotion in so far as pay-fixation
is concerned. Therefore, the option of pay-fixation in the next higher grade
based on the date of increment may be allowed.
In terms of
DoP&T Office Memorandum No. 6(2)/23/77-Welfare dated 11th December, 1979,
all posts in the canteen and tiffin room being run departmentally by the
Government of India were treated posts in connection with the affairs of the
Union. Subsequently, vide Office Memorandum No.12/3/92-Director[C] dated
16.9.92, canteen employees were declared as Central Government employees with
effect from 1.10.1991. Whether canteen employees will be treated as
Government employees with effect from 1.10.79 (the date from which they were
declared as holders of civil posts) or with effect from 1.10.1991 for the
purpose of granting of upgradations under ACPS?
The matter has been
examined in consultation with Director(Canteen) and it has been decided that
the benefits of ACPS shall be extended to the canteen employees by reckoning
from the date of their initial appointment as direct recruit on regular basis
as the crucial date for granting the 1st/2nd upgradations. Needless to say,
upgradations shall be allowed only in those cases where promotions have not
been made even after putting in 12/24 years of regular service counted in the
manner indicated above.
ACPS stipulates that if the first upgradation gets postponed on account of
the employee not found fit or due to departmental proceedings,
etc, this would have consequential effect on the second upgradation which
would also get deferred accordingly. In other words, the employee who has
been denied the first financial upgradation (meaning withholding of this
benefit) would again be penalised even after having completed 24 years of
regular service. This certainly is a case of double jeopardy and should not
ACPS unnecessarily provides for deferment of second financial upgradation by
the period for which an employee is debarred from regular promotionin
the higher grade. In other words, it connects the second upgradation under
ACPS with regular promotion to the 1st ACP grade. This is quite unwarranted
as the schemes of ACP and regular promotions are to run concurrently and
parallel to each other and should, therefore, not be connected in the manner
it has been done. This condition may, therefore, be withdrawn.
In regard to
deferment of grant of ACP benefits on account of disciplinary proceedings or
refusal of promotion, it is mentioned that the ACPS in the matter has to
follow the same pattern as that obtains in the case of regular promotion. The
basic idea behind making this provision is that there shall be uniformity of
treatment both in the case of ACPS and regular promotions. Moreover, the
Government has already modified/ moderated the Fifth Central Pay Commission
recommendation that in case of refusal to accept regular promotion
subsequently, the employee concerned should be reverted from the higher grade
granted under ACPS. The Scheme adopted by the Government, as such, guards
against this adverse effect and thereby has already brought about an
improvement upon the Pay Commission recommendation in this regard.
Ministry/Department, not the employees have been given option in the matter
to choose between two schemes, i.e. existing time-bound promotion scheme or
the ACP Scheme. It is suggested that the said option should be exercised by
the administrative Ministry/ Department after consulting the staff
representatives in the forum of respective Departmental Councils.
The ACPS has been introduced
after consulting all concerned including the Staff Side in the National
Council of JCM and with the approval of the Cabinet. Hence, there is no need
to associate the Staff Side while exercising the said preference by the
administrative Ministry/Department concerned. However, their view point could
be taken into account while exercising such preference. The Administration
will, however, not be bound by it.
LDC grade from Group ‘D’ should not be treated as promotion because LDC is
not in the direct line of promotion for Group ‘D’ employees. Two services are
altogether different. No Group ‘D’ employee can be appointed/promoted to a
Group ‘C’ post like LDC etc who does not possess the educational
qualifications prescribed in the Recruitment Rules. The Group ‘D’ employees
have to satisfy certain minimum standards of selection and only then they are
eligible for appointment to Group ‘C’ posts like LDC. Besides, Government
have already agreed in the case of P&T Department not to treat
appointment/ promotion of Postman as Postal Clerk etc as promotion for the
purpose of OTB. OTBP is given to such employees (Postman etc) after
completing period of residency as Postal Clerk. The same decision may be made
applicable to ACP as well.
(b)A number of Group
‘D’ employees are appointed as Despatch Riders/Staff Car Drivers, Gestener
Operators etc. Since these posts are not in the direct line of promotion for
Group ‘D’ employees and are in the normal course meant to be filled by direct
recruitment, such appointments should not be treated as promotion for ACPS.
(a) As already
clarified in relation to item at S.No.8, in the existing arrangement,
specified quota of LDC vacancies are filled by Group-‘D’ staff on the basis
of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination. As such, post of LDC may be
treated as promotion post under ACPS for Group ‘D’ staff.
(b) The appointment of Group ‘D’ employees as Despatch Rider/Staff Car Driver
is on transfer basis in a higher pay-scale. This point has already been
clarified in relation to items at S.Nos.4, 5 and 6 above.
An employee may be
given second upgradation under ACPS as soon as he completes 12 years of
regular service from the date of his earlier promotion or as soon as he
completes 24 years of regular service, whichever is earlier.
The periodicity of
12/24 years of regular service for grant of upgradations under ACPS cannot be
relaxed. Grant of the first regular promotion prior to completion of 12 years
of regular service from the direct entry grade shall have no bearing on the
periodicity of the second upgradation under ACPS, which shall be granted only
after completion of 24 years of regular service and only if the second
regular promotion has not been earned in between.
administrative offices of the Government of India are having over-lapping
duties as well as over-lapping scales of pay. Both are inter-changeable. In
fact, division in the duties is more artificial than real. Therefore,
promotion of LDC to the post of UDC should not be treated as promotion for
the purpose of ACPS.
Both the posts
constitute two rungs in a hierarchy and, as such, promotion of LDCs as UDCs
shall be treated as promotion for the purpose of ACPS. Moreover, ACPS is not
designed to interfere with the existing cadre structure.
The condition 8 of
the Annexure-I of the DoP&T O.M. dated 9th August, 1999 operates very
harshly against senior employees. It will give rise to serious anomalies in a
situation where junior employee in a grade being direct recruit are given ACP
upgradation on completing period of residency, claims of senior employees in
the same grade and in the same department are ignored merely on the ground
that they have already been promoted twice earlier. It would, as such, be
very unfair to ignore the claim of seniors as that would lead to heart-burning
The ACPS is to act
as a ‘safety net’ to provide relief in cases of acute stagnation. The concept
of “senior-junior” is quite alien to the idea behind the ACPS
recommended by the Fifth Central Pay Commission which had also quite
specifically recommended against it. Benefits granted under the Scheme are
“personal” in nature and in recognition of long hardships faced by
stagnating employees. Moreover, it does not grant any status related benefits
– nor does it change the seniority position. Senior will continue to be
senior even if his junior has earned upgradations under ACPS. Relief granted
to Government servants facing stagnation/hardships, as visualised by ACPS,
cannot provide a ground for claiming identical relief by others who are not
All retirement and
other terminal benefits would be granted on the basis of actual pay drawn in
the upgraded ACP scale and condition No.6 of Annexure-I to the effect that it
would not confer any privileges related to higher status would not be invoked
to deny the retirement/terminal benefits based on the actual pay drawn in
1st/2nd ACP grades at the time of retirement.
Yes. The retirement/
terminal benefits would be on the basis of upgraded pay-scale, if any,
granted under ACPS.
upgradations under ACPS are to be allowed to the employees who are on
deputation in other organisations/on training/ on study leave?
It has been
clarified vide Condition No.6 of ACPS that such upgradation shall not entitle
for deputation to higher posts. Therefore, as a corollary, upgradation under
ACPS shall be allowed, in respect of employees who are on deputation, only on
notional basis, as otherwise such upgradation in the cadre may have bearing
on the deputation pay of the official. However, an employee will get the
actual benefit on the basis of such notional pay-fixation under ACPS with
prospective effect only on repatriation. Similarly, since an employee draws
leave salary while on leave, he will get similar treatment as allowed to a person
on deputation. However, upgradation under ACPS may be allowed to an employee
who is on training as he is on duty for all practical purposes.
Whether the benefit
of past service will be extended to temporary status employees after their
No, the benefit of
past service shall not be extended to temporary status employees after their
regularisation for the purpose of ACPS.
What is an isolated
post for the purpose of the ACP Scheme.
Isolated post is a stand
alone post, having neither feeder grade nor promotional grade.
As such, a post having no promotional grade but having a feeder grade and
vice-versa shall not be treated as isolated post for the purpose of ACPS.
cadres/hierarchy is limited to two grades only, what should be the pay-scale
for grant of second upgradation under ACPS?
cadre/hierarchy shall not fall in the isolated category as defined at S.No.31
above. Hence, the standard/common pay-scales mentioned in Annexure-II of the
Office Memorandum dated 9.8.1999 shall not be applicable in such cases.
Action in such cases may, therefore, be taken as per following
(i) If such
cadre/hierarchy exists in the Ministry/ Department concerned, the second
upgradation may be allowed in keeping with the pay-scale of an analogous
grade of a cadre/post in the same Ministry/Department. However, if no such
grade exists in the Ministry/Department concerned, comparison may be made
with an analogous grade available in other Ministries/Departments.
(ii) In the case of
attached/subordinate offices, the second upgradation under ACPS may be given
in keeping with the pay-scale of an analogous grade of a cadre/post of the
concerned office. However, if no such cadre/post exists in the concerned
office, comparison may be made with an analogous grade available in other
attached/subordinate offices of the Ministry/Department concerned.
Stay connected with us via Facebook, Google+ or Email Subscription.