The Jharkhand High Court reaffirms that long-serving government employees, post-superannuation, cannot be denied ACP/MACP benefits merely because their services were not “confirmed,” especially when all post-retiral benefits have been disbursed and pension is being received. This judgment strengthens employee rights in service law and stands as binding precedent within Jharkhand.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPC/5789/2025 of ABDESH KUMAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND |
| CNR | JHHC010053832025 |
| Date of Registration | 10-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | Sri Ananda Sen, J. |
| Court | High Court of Jharkhand |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the State of Jharkhand |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms entitlement to ACP/MACP on basis of long service and post-retiral benefits paid |
| Type of Law | Service Law; Government Employment Benefits |
| Questions of Law | Whether denial of ACP/MACP benefits is permissible solely on the ground of “non-confirmation” of service after retirement and payment of all retiral benefits. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that it is unacceptable for the State to deny ACP/MACP benefits to an employee who has served for over 37 years and has already received all post-retiral benefits, including pension, solely on the ground that his service was not “confirmed.” Not being confirmed in service after such prolonged and undisputed service, post-retirement benefit dispersal, and pension receipt cannot form a valid legal basis for denying the accrued financial advantages of ACP/MACP. If the employee was working in a non-sanctioned post, a supernumerary post must be created for the purposes of benefits. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | The Court relied on principles of fairness and the factual completion of service, payment of retiral benefits, and ongoing pension as a compelling ground to direct grant of ACP/MACP. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner served the Department of Commercial Taxes for over 37 years, retired on 31.01.2017, and received all post-retiral benefits. He was denied ACP/MACP solely on the ground that his service was not confirmed, leading to this litigation. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and State authorities within Jharkhand |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and service law benches nationally |
| Follows | Principle of non-denial of financial service benefits after long and undisputed government service |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that denial of ACP/MACP benefits on the sole ground of “non-confirmation” is untenable if the employee has retired after long service and received all retirement benefits.
- Introduces the directive that a supernumerary post should be created for purposes of granting ACP/MACP if the petitioner was not on a sanctioned post.
- Strengthens employees’ ability to claim service-related financial benefits post-retirement, even when facing technical irregularities in confirmation paperwork.
- Lawyers can rely on this for similar writs involving denial of financial upgradation/ACP/MACP due to service confirmation issues.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted that the petitioner served the State for over 37 years and was granted full retiral benefits and ongoing pension.
- It found it unjustifiable to deny ACP/MACP benefits solely on the “non-confirmation” of his service.
- The Court reasoned that if the State recognized the service for all other retirement-related entitlements, the same logic must apply to ACP/MACP benefits.
- The Court rejected the “no sanctioned post” objection by the State, finding that the creation of a supernumerary post would address any technical defect.
- Direct orders were issued to grant ACP/MACP and revise retiral benefits within 12 weeks, emphasizing the imperative of fairness and avoidance of technical denial.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Served the Department for over 37 years.
- Received all post-retiral benefits.
- Was denied ACP/MACP solely due to “non-confirmation” of service, which is unfair and arbitrary.
Respondent (State)
- Denied ACP/MACP benefit citing that the petitioner’s services were not confirmed.
- Raised objection regarding non-availability of a sanctioned post.
Factual Background
The petitioner was a government employee in the Department of Commercial Taxes, serving for more than 37 years before retiring on 31.01.2017. Despite receiving all post-retirement benefits and pension, he was denied the financial upgrades of ACP/MACP solely on the ground that his service was never “confirmed.” This prompted him to approach the High Court for redressal.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment relates to service law provisions concerning the Assured Career Progression (ACP) / Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) schemes for government employees.
- The Court did not interpret specific statutory sections but analyzed the administrative rationale and fairness inherent in the application of ACP/MACP schemes.
- Addressed the procedural issue of “confirmation” and the status of sanctioned versus supernumerary posts for grant of benefits.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court directed creation of a supernumerary post, if necessary, to ensure grant of ACP/MACP benefits when the petitioner was not on a sanctioned post.
- Set a clear timeline (12 weeks) for implementation of its order by the concerned authority.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – This judgment follows established principles of fairness in granting financial benefits for long-serving government employees, adding clarity to ACP/MACP entitlement post-retirement.