MACP vs promotion

MACP gives one level of the pay matrix and no post. A promotion gives the post. The level reached, the pay fixation, the benchmarks and the stepping-up bar.

Updated 10 October 2026

MACP and a promotion both raise pay by moving an employee to a higher pay level, and they are otherwise unrelated events. A promotion is an appointment to a higher post, carrying its duties, its classification and a place in the seniority of the higher grade. A financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression scheme moves the pay and leaves everything else exactly where it was: the same post, the same designation, the same work, the same seniority.

Paragraph 19 of Annexure-I to Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 22 October 2019 states the point without hedging. The Scheme contemplates merely placement on a personal basis in the immediate higher pay level and the grant of financial benefits only, and does not amount to an actual or functional promotion. Paragraph 16 adds that on grant of the upgradation there is no change in designation, classification or higher status, while allowing the benefits that follow the pay drawn, such as a house building advance or allotment of government accommodation.

The distinction decides real money. It decides how far the pay rises, whether a junior who overtakes a senior can be corrected, what happens if a promotion is turned down, and how many upgradations remain after a promotion has already been taken. One part of it was litigated for a decade before the Supreme Court closed it in 2020.

Promotion: the post moves with the pay

A promotion is the appointment of an employee to a higher post in the cadre. It requires a vacancy, satisfaction of the eligibility conditions in the recruitment rules, and clearance by a departmental promotion committee. It changes the classification of the post held, it places the employee in the seniority list of the higher grade, and it carries the accountability that goes with the higher duties.

The pay is fixed under Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016: one increment in the level from which the employee is promoted, then placement in the higher level at the cell equal to or next above that figure. The higher level is the level attached to the promotional post, and in many cadres the promotional post is not one step up. A Level 6 post whose promotional post sits at Level 8 gives a two-level jump on promotion.

MACP: three upgradations, one level each

MACP applies where the promotions did not come. Paragraph 1 of Annexure-I gives three financial upgradations, counted from the direct entry grade, on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service, or 10 years of continuous service in the same level of the pay matrix, whichever is earlier. The alternative trigger matters for an employee promoted early who then stops moving: it brings the next upgradation forward to ten years in the level rather than making the employee wait for the next decade mark.

Paragraph 3 caps the whole thing at Level 15, the Higher Administrative Grade. Paragraph 3 of the covering Office Memorandum excludes officers of the Organised Group A Services altogether, along with casual employees, employees holding temporary status, and those appointed on an ad hoc or contract basis.

The upgradation is personal to the employee under paragraph 20 and has no relevance to the seniority position, which is why it produces no consequential vacancy and no chain of further movements in the cadre.

The level reached, and the case that settled it

The sharpest difference is which level the employee lands in, and it was the subject of long litigation. Employees argued that a financial upgradation should carry them to the level of the next promotional post in their own hierarchy. The government’s position was that MACP grants only the immediate next higher level, whatever the promotional post pays.

Paragraph 2 of Annexure-I states the government position plainly: where regular promotion is not between two successive pay levels, the level at the time of financial upgradation “can, in certain cases, be lower than what is available at the time of regular promotion”, and in such cases the higher level attached to the next promotion post is given only at the time of regular promotion.

Several tribunals and High Courts had gone the other way, relying on an earlier order in the Raj Pal matter. The Supreme Court resolved it in Union of India v. M.V. Mohanan Nair, 2020 INSC 281, (2020) 5 SCC 421, decided on 5 March 2020. The Court held that an employee is entitled to the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay structure, not to the grade pay of the next promotional post; that the design of the Scheme is a matter of government policy resting on the recommendations of an expert body; and that the Raj Pal order, whose special leave petition had been dismissed on the ground of delay, was not a binding precedent. It set aside the High Court judgments that had granted the promotional hierarchy. The Court applied the same reasoning again in Director, Directorate of Enforcement v. K. Sudheesh Kumar, Civil Appeal No. 442 of 2022, decided on 22 January 2022.

The position today is therefore fixed: a financial upgradation moves an employee up by exactly one level of the matrix, and the number of levels is not negotiable by cadre.

The pay fixation is shared; the destination is not

Paragraph 6 of Annexure-I fixes pay on a financial upgradation granted on or after 1 January 2016 under Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, notified by the Department of Expenditure on 25 July 2016, read with Office Memorandum No. 13/02/2017-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 27 July 2017. That is the same Rule 13 that fixes pay on promotion, and the method is identical: one increment in the level held, then the cell equal to or next above in the higher level.

	Promotion	MACP
Fixation rule	Rule 13, CCS (RP) Rules, 2016	Rule 13, CCS (RP) Rules, 2016
Higher level used	Level of the promotional post	Immediate next level of the matrix
Post and duties	Change	No change
Classification and status	Change	No change, paragraph 16
Seniority in higher grade	Acquired	None, paragraph 20
Stepping up if a junior draws more	Available	Barred, paragraph 9
Benchmark	2002 instructions, by level	Very Good for all posts, from 25 July 2016
Number available in a career	Limited by vacancies	Three, paragraph 1

Paragraph 7 gives an option that applies equally to both events. A government servant may elect under Fundamental Rule 22(1)(a)(1) to have pay fixed in the higher post or level either from the date of the promotion or upgradation, or from the date of the next increment, which is 1 January or 1 July. The choice is arithmetic, not preference: an upgradation falling shortly before an increment date usually favours one option and one falling shortly after favours the other.

The benchmarks are not the same

Both events are subject to a performance benchmark, and the two benchmarks parted company in 2016.

For a financial upgradation the bar is Very Good for all the posts, under paragraph 17 of the Scheme as substituted by Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 28 September 2016, for every upgradation falling due on or after 25 July 2016. Very Good means an overall APAR grade of 6 to short of 8. Paragraph 17(ii) of Annexure-I keeps the older benchmark for the appraisal years 2015-16 and earlier, tabulating it as Good for Level 11 and below and Very Good for Level 12 and above. The detail is at MACP benchmark.

For a promotion the benchmarks were not changed. They remain those of Office Memorandum No. 35034/7/97-Estt.(D) dated 8 February 2002: Very Good for promotion to Pay Level 12 and above, and Good for grades below Pay Level 12. The 7th Central Pay Commission had recommended in paragraph 5.1.45 that the bar be raised for promotion as well, and the government recorded its acceptance, but the operative words of the 2016 Office Memorandum substitute paragraph 17 of the MACP Scheme and nothing else.

The result is a gap that catches people out. An employee at Level 8 with a Good record can be cleared for regular promotion by a departmental promotion committee and refused a MACP upgradation by the screening committee in the same year, on the same reports.

No stepping up, with one transitional exception

A senior whose pay falls behind a junior’s normally has the stepping up of pay remedy. MACP removes it. Paragraph 9 of the Office Memorandum of 22 October 2019 reads: “No stepping up of pay in the level would be admissible with regard to junior getting more pay than the senior on account of pay fixation under MACP Scheme.” Paragraph 20 of Annexure-I reinforces it from the other side, barring an additional financial upgradation for a senior on the ground that a junior in the grade has reached a higher level under the Scheme.

Paragraph 20 then carves out one case, and it is a transitional one tied to the change of pay structure. A senior granted MACP to a higher grade pay before 1 January 2016 who draws less in the revised pay structure than a junior granted MACP on or after that date has pay stepped up to the junior’s figure, with effect from the date of the junior’s MACP, subject to four conditions: both belong to the same cadre and are in the same level on grant of MACP; the existing and revised pay structures of the lower and higher posts are identical; the senior was drawing equal or more pay than the junior at the time of the grant; and the anomaly follows directly from Fundamental Rule 22 or another rule regulating pay fixation. A proviso withdraws the remedy where the junior was drawing more only because of advance increments.

Outside that window, an employee overtaken by a junior through MACP fixation has no remedy at all. The Supreme Court upheld the bar in M.V. Mohanan Nair.

Promotions count against the three

The two events share one ceiling. Paragraph 8 of Annexure-I provides that promotions earned in a post carrying the same pay level in the promotional hierarchy as per the recruitment rules are counted for the purpose of the Scheme. An employee who has been promoted twice has one upgradation left, not three.

Paragraph 27 works this out in illustrations, and they are worth following because they show the interlock better than any summary. An employee in Level 2 promoted to Level 4 on completing 8 years, then serving 10 more years without promotion, takes the second financial upgradation in Level 5 at 18 years. If no promotion follows, the third comes in Level 6 at 28 years. If instead a second promotion arrives to Level 7 at 23 years, the third upgradation comes in Level 8 at 30 years.

A second illustration runs the other order. An employee in Level 2 granted the first upgradation in Level 3 at 10 years, who is then regularly promoted to Level 4 five years later, takes the second upgradation in Level 5 at 20 years and the third in Level 6 at 30 years. Where two promotions are earned before 20 years, only the third upgradation remains, admissible on completing 10 years in the level from the date of the second promotion or at the 30-year mark, whichever is earlier.

Paragraph 5 adds an exclusion that runs the other way. Promotions earned, or upgradations granted under the Scheme in the past, to grades which fall in the same level of the pay matrix because of the merger of pay scales or the upgradation of posts recommended by the 7th CPC are ignored for the purpose of granting upgradations. A promotion that did not actually change the level does not consume one of the three.

Refusing a promotion

Turning down a promotion is the one place where the two schemes are directly hostile to each other, and the timing decides everything. Under paragraph 24 of Annexure-I:

Where a regular promotion was offered and refused before the employee became entitled to an upgradation, no financial upgradation is allowed, on the reasoning that the employee has not stagnated for lack of opportunities.
Where the upgradation had already been granted for stagnation and the promotion is refused afterwards, the upgradation is not withdrawn. The employee is simply not considered for any further upgradation until he agrees to be considered for promotion again, and the next upgradation is then deferred by the period of debarment arising from the refusal.

The asymmetry is deliberate. The Scheme exists to compensate for an absence of opportunity, so an employee who declines the opportunity loses the compensation, but not retrospectively.

Deputation, ad hoc posts and an upgraded post

Three situations sit between the two events and are settled by express provisions.

An employee on deputation need not revert to the parent department to take an upgradation. Paragraph 26 allows a fresh option to draw pay either in the level attached to the deputation post or in the level admissible under MACP, whichever is beneficial, with the deputation duty allowance then regulated under Office Memorandum No. 2/11/2017-Estt.(Pay-II) dated 24 November 2017.

A person holding a higher post purely on an ad hoc basis is considered by the screening committee along with everyone else under paragraph 25, and takes the benefit of the financial upgradation on reversion to the lower post. The ad hoc stint neither counts as a promotion nor blocks the upgradation.

Where the substantive post itself was upgraded by the 7th CPC, paragraph 6.1 refixes an earlier MACP. An employee granted a financial upgradation in the next higher grade pay under the 2009 Scheme, whose post was then placed in a higher level, has that upgradation refixed at the next higher level of the pay matrix. The Office Memorandum gives the worked case of a Postal Inspector at grade pay Rs. 4,200 who had taken the first MACP at grade pay Rs. 4,600: with the post itself upgraded to grade pay Rs. 4,600, which is Level 7, the first MACP moves to Level 8.

Which is better

A promotion, wherever one exists. It reaches the level of the post rather than exactly one level up, it carries the classification and the seniority, and it leaves the stepping-up remedy intact. Every advantage MACP has is defensive.

That is the design. The Scheme is a floor for an employee in a cadre where promotional posts are too few, guaranteeing that pay does not sit still for a decade at a time. Read as a substitute for promotion it looks miserly, because it gives one level and no status. Read as what it is, a guarantee against stagnation that operates whether or not the cadre ever creates a vacancy, it does the job it was built for. The predecessor ACP scheme of August 1999 was more generous on the level reached, and its replacement in 2008 is what produced the litigation the Supreme Court closed in 2020.

In force today

A promotion is an appointment to a higher post with its duties, classification and seniority, and pay fixed under Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 at the level of that post. MACP gives placement in the immediate next higher level of the pay matrix at 10, 20 and 30 years of service or 10 years in the same level, whichever is earlier, on a personal basis, with no change of post, duties, classification or seniority under paragraphs 16, 19 and 20 of Annexure-I to DoPT Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 22 October 2019. Both use Rule 13 and both carry the FR 22(1)(a)(1) option on the date under paragraph 7. The level reached under MACP is one step and not the level of the next promotional post, settled in Union of India v. M.V. Mohanan Nair, 2020 INSC 281, decided 5 March 2020. The benchmark for MACP is Very Good for all the posts from 25 July 2016; the promotion benchmarks of 8 February 2002 are unchanged. Paragraph 9 bars stepping up, with one transitional exception in paragraph 20 for a senior granted MACP before 1 January 2016. Three upgradations are available in a career up to Level 15, with earned promotions counted under paragraph 8.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the difference between MACP and promotion?

A promotion is an appointment to a higher post, carrying its duties, its status and a place in the seniority of the higher grade. A financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression scheme moves the pay and nothing else. Paragraph 19 of Annexure-I to Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 22 October 2019 puts it directly: the Scheme contemplates merely placement on a personal basis in the immediate higher pay level and the grant of financial benefits only, and does not amount to an actual or functional promotion. Paragraph 16 adds that there is no change in designation, classification or higher status.

Does MACP go to the next promotional post or the next pay level?

To the immediate next level of the pay matrix, which is often lower than the level of the next promotional post. Paragraph 2 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 states that where regular promotion is not between two successive pay levels, the level reached under MACP can be lower than the one available on regular promotion, and that the higher level attached to the promotion post is given only at the time of regular promotion. The Supreme Court settled the point in Union of India v. M.V. Mohanan Nair, 2020 INSC 281, decided on 5 March 2020.

Is MACP counted as a promotion?

No. Paragraph 19 of Annexure-I to the Office Memorandum of 22 October 2019 states that the Scheme does not amount to an actual or functional promotion, and paragraph 20 makes the upgradation purely personal to the employee with no relevance to the seniority position. The employee keeps the same post, the same designation and the same duties. The one direction in which the two are linked runs the other way: paragraph 8 counts promotions already earned against the three upgradations available.

How is pay fixed on MACP compared with promotion?

By the same rule, to a different destination. Paragraph 6 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 fixes pay on a financial upgradation granted on or after 1 January 2016 under Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, the same rule that governs a promotion: one increment in the level held, then placement at the cell equal to or next above that figure in the higher level. The difference is which higher level is used. On MACP it is always the immediate next level; on promotion it is the level attached to the post, which can be two or more levels up.

Can pay be fixed from the date of next increment instead?

Yes, on either event. Paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 gives a government servant an option under Fundamental Rule 22(1)(a)(1) to have pay fixed in the higher post or pay level either from the date of the promotion or upgradation, or from the date of the next increment, which is 1 January or 1 July. The choice is worth making arithmetically rather than by habit, because which option pays more depends on where in the year the event falls.

What benchmark is needed for MACP, and is it the same for promotion?

They are different, and this is the most common mistake on the subject. For a financial upgradation the benchmark is Very Good for all the posts from 25 July 2016, under paragraph 17 of the Scheme as substituted by Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 28 September 2016. For a promotion, the benchmarks are still those of Office Memorandum No. 35034/7/97-Estt.(D) dated 8 February 2002: Very Good for promotion to Pay Level 12 and above, and Good below that. An employee can therefore be found fit for promotion and unfit for MACP on the same appraisal record.

Can a junior draw more pay than a senior after MACP?

Yes, and the rules do not correct it except in one case. Paragraph 9 of Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 22 October 2019 states that no stepping up of pay in the level would be admissible with regard to a junior getting more pay than the senior on account of pay fixation under the MACP Scheme. Paragraph 20 of Annexure-I carries one exception: a senior granted MACP before 1 January 2016 who draws less in the revised pay structure than a junior granted MACP on or after that date is stepped up to the junior’s pay, subject to four conditions on cadre, level, pay structure and the source of the anomaly.

Do promotions already earned count against the three MACP upgradations?

Yes. Paragraph 8 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 provides that promotions earned in a post carrying the same pay level in the promotional hierarchy as per the recruitment rules shall be counted for the purpose of the Scheme. The illustrations in paragraph 27 work it through: an employee in Level 2 promoted to Level 4 at 8 years, with no promotion after that, takes the second financial upgradation in Level 5 at 18 years and the third in Level 6 at 28 years.

What happens if an employee refuses a promotion?

It depends on when the refusal happens. Paragraph 24 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 provides that where a regular promotion was offered and refused before the employee became entitled to an upgradation, no financial upgradation is allowed at all, because the employee has not stagnated for lack of opportunity. Where the upgradation had already been granted for stagnation and the promotion is refused afterwards, the upgradation is not withdrawn, but no further upgradation is considered until the employee agrees to be considered for promotion again, and the next upgradation is deferred by the period of debarment.

How does MACP work for an employee on deputation?

No reversion is needed. Paragraph 26 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 provides that employees on deputation need not revert to the parent department to take the benefit, and may exercise a fresh option to draw pay either in the level attached to the deputation post or in the level admissible under MACP, whichever is beneficial. Where the employee opts for the MACP level, the deputation duty allowance is regulated under Office Memorandum No. 2/11/2017-Estt.(Pay-II) dated 24 November 2017.

What happens when the substantive post is upgraded by the 7th CPC?

The earlier upgradation is refixed. Paragraph 6.1 of Annexure-I to the guidelines of 22 October 2019 covers an employee granted MACP in the next higher grade pay under the 2009 Scheme whose substantive post was then upgraded to a higher pay level on implementation of the 7th CPC recommendations, and refixes that MACP at the next higher level of the pay matrix. The Office Memorandum illustrates it with a Postal Inspector: upgraded from grade pay Rs. 4,200 to Rs. 4,600, corresponding to Level 7, the first MACP moves to Level 8.

Which is better, MACP or promotion?

A promotion, wherever one is available. It carries the post, the duties, the status and the seniority of the higher grade, it can reach a level two or more steps up rather than exactly one, and it does not carry the paragraph 9 bar on stepping up. MACP is a floor rather than a ladder: it guarantees three financial upgradations across a career, up to Level 15 under paragraph 3 of Annexure-I, to an employee in a cadre with too few promotional posts.

External references

References

Consolidated guidelines regarding the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme for the Central Government Civilian Employees, Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 22 October 2019, paragraph 9 on the bar on stepping up, read with paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 6.1, 7, 8, 16, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26 and 27 of Annexure-I.
Union of India v. M.V. Mohanan Nair, Supreme Court of India, 2020 INSC 281, (2020) 5 SCC 421, decided 5 March 2020: financial upgradation under MACP is to the immediate next higher grade pay and not to the grade pay of the next promotional post; the Raj Pal order, dismissed on the ground of delay, is not a binding precedent. The appeals on stepping up to the pay of juniors under MACP were de-tagged and listed separately and are not decided in this judgment.
Director, Directorate of Enforcement v. K. Sudheesh Kumar, Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No. 442 of 2022, decided 22 January 2022, applying M.V. Mohanan Nair.
Rule 13 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, notified by the Department of Expenditure on 25 July 2016: fixation of pay on promotion or on financial upgradation, one increment in the level held followed by placement at the cell equal to or next above in the higher level, read with Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 13/02/2017-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 27 July 2017.
Fundamental Rule 22(1)(a)(1), as applied by paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the Office Memorandum of 22 October 2019, giving the option to fix pay from the date of promotion or upgradation or from the date of the next increment.
Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2015-Estt.(D) dated 28 September 2016, substituting paragraph 17 of the Scheme to prescribe the benchmark of Very Good for all the posts with effect from 25 July 2016.
Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 35034/7/97-Estt.(D) dated 8 February 2002, prescribing the departmental promotion committee benchmarks of Very Good for Pay Level 12 and above and Good for grades below it.
Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum No. 2/11/2017-Estt.(Pay-II) dated 24 November 2017, on regulation of deputation duty allowance where an employee on deputation opts for the pay level admissible under the MACP Scheme.