MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI vs VEENA RANI

Judgment text excerpt

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 104/2025 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Divya Swamy, Standing Counsel for MCD with Mr. Yash Jain, Ms. Akriti Singh, Mr. Yashovarman, Mr. Rishav Ranjan and Ms. Nidhi Kumar, Advs. versus VEENA RANI .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 08.01.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The respondent was appointed as Assistant Teacher under the Municipal Corporation of Delhi1 vide order dated 27 December 1975. She joined the post on 1 January 1976 and retired from the same post after more than 38 years of service on 31 August 2014, on attaining the date of superannuation. 2. The dispute in the present case relates to the respondent’s entitlement for the benefit of the Assured Career Progression Scheme2, introduced by the 5th Central Pay Commission and the 1 “MCD” hereinafter 2 “ACP Scheme” hereinafter Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT W.P.(C) 104/2025 Page 1 of 5 KUMAR Signing Date:09.01.2025 21:40:50 Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme3 introduced by the 6th Central Pay Commission. 3. Under the ACP Scheme, an employee was entitled to two financial upgradations on completion of 12 and 24 years of service, if the employee was not regularly promoted in the interregnum. It is not in dispute that the next promotional post of the respondent was the post of Trained Graduate Teacher4. The availability of the benefit of the ACP Scheme was subject to the employee concerned having the requisite educational qualifications which, for the post of TGT, which was a graduation degree and degree/diploma in training/education or Senior Anglo Vernacular certificate5 with a minimum of five years regular service as Assistant