Request for the considering the efficacy of upgrading of benchmark from' good' to' very good' for grant of MACP from the reporting year of 2016 -- 17

Request for the considering the efficacy of upgrading of benchmark from' good' to' very good' for grant of MACP from the reporting year of 2016 -- 17

Request for the considering the efficacy of upgrading of benchmark from'  good' to'  very good' for grant of MACP from the reporting year of 2016 -- 17 

Many of officials have been denied MACP for want of upgraded very good benchmark even for the reporting year prior to the cut off year 16- 17 (25.7.16)  on the plea and 

taking it, otherwise, that the DPC fallen due after 25.7.16 should consider only very good benchmarking.

 Thus the conduct of DPC is construed as deciding factor of wanting in for 5 years benchmark rather than the reporting years prior and after the cut off date.

The DPCs elsewhere have taken the quantitative difference of APAR as such with reference to 25.7.16 instead mandating the upgraded benchmark even for the reporting years in which benchmark ' good' is contemplated optimum for the positive result in DSC.

A similar situation prevailed in 2008- 09, when numerical grading with benchmark was introduced replacing the 'average ' In order to render natural justice to those affected by changes in grading, an opportunity was given to them all for a fresh appeal to enhance the upgrading and thus the ill effect of 'average' in any of  years during the zone of consideration was dispelled. 

In the absence of any such reconciliation measure to remedy the under grading in the present instance, it is requested that the insistence of very good may kindly be insisted from the reporting year 16-17 onwards.