Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Patel Vipulkumar Ramanlal vs National Technical Research ... on 17 December, 2025
1
OA No.535/2015
Item No.60/C4
CENTRALADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 535/2015
Reserved on: 20.11.2025
Pronounced on: 17.12.2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member(A)
1. Patel Vipulkumar Ramanlal
S/o Patel Ramanlal Ramjibhai
R/o B-9 Scientist Hostel, NTRO
Near SSB 25th Battalion
Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road
Land Mark-Metro Pillar-154
New Delhi-110047
Scientist 'C' in NTRO
(Age 32 years)
2. Anindya Kundu
S/o Monoranjan Kundu
R/o DS-21, MS Block,
6th Floor, Central Govt. Hostel Complex,
7 Merlin Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata
Scientist 'C' in NTRO
(Age 32 years)
... Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. Ajesh Luthra)
Versus
National Technical Research Organisation
Through Chairman
Block-III, Old JNU Campus
Ber Sarai, New Delhi-110067.
... Respondent
(By Advocate: Mr.Gyanendra Singh)
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30'
2
OA No.535/2015
Item No.60/C4
ORDER
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S, Khati, Member (A) :
In the present Original Application (O.A.) filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have sought for the following reliefs:
"(i) Direct the respondents to consider and grant the FCS benefit / promotion to the applicants to the next higher grade of Scientist 'C' w.e.f. 1.1.2010 and/or 1.7.2011 or in the alternate w.e.f. 1.1.2012 with all consequential benefits including monetary benefits.
(ii) to pass such other and further orders which their lordships of this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in the existing facts and circumstances of the case."
2. Briefly stated, the applicants were appointed on 24.07.2008 and 26.08.2008 as Scientists 'B' with the respondents and upon three years of service, a Scientist 'B' is eligible for promotion/upgradation to the next grade, viz. Scientist 'C' under the Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS). Pursuant to FCS, the respondents issued a memorandum dated 09.02.2012 (Annexure A/2) declaring 30 Scientists having been cleared by the Assessment Board for conducting their interviews, however, the names of the applicants did not figure in the said memorandum. The applicants preferred several representations followed by reminders (Annexure A/4 colly.), but no below benchmark ACRs had been communicated to them prior to the said memorandum and even thereafter till date. In October, 2013, some other Scientists were given upgradation but applicants still left Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 3 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 out. Subsequently in September, 2014, the applicants were assessed and vide order dated 14.10.2014 (Annexure A/5), the applicants were granted upgradation under FCS benefit w.e.f. 01.01.2013 (Sl.Nos. 6 and 3 of the order, respectively), while several others who had also joined in 2008, have been given the benefit w.e.f. 01.01.2012. It is submitted that similar relief has been granted by the respondents for 2010 and 2012 batch after the Court's orders vide order dated 17.10.2014 (Annexure A/10). It is also submitted that the respondents have granted FCS benefit to those candidates who are M.Sc. (Mathematics) and not even eligible for the post of Scientist. On the contrary, as per respondents own norms (Familiarization Programme), Ph.D. is treated as equivalent to 4 years experience and M.Tech. as two years experience. Thus, both the applicants who were M.Tech. even prior to their joining, are required to be granted FCS benefit from Scientist 'B' to Scientist 'C' w.e.f. 01.01.2010. However, despite several representations for grant of FCS from the due dates as no below benchmark ACR was communicated to them, the rectification has not been done by the respondents. Hence, this O.A.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the case of the applicants ought to be covered under the OM dated 10.09.2010 and not by the OM dated 09.11.1998. He submitted that the date of consideration is 01.01.2012, however, prior to that, the OM dated 10.09.2010 had came into effect, which reads as under: Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 4 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 "A Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS) for scientists is in position in some of the scientific Ministries/Departments of the Government of India and the same is presently governed by the guidelines issued by this Department under O.M. No.2/41/97- PIC dated the 9th November, 1998. There is also in position a separate, merit based promotion scheme in the DRDO and the Departments of Atomic Energy and Space. The Sixth Central Pay Commission (6th CPC) has examined these schemes in detail and observed that various time-bound promotion schemes may be necessary for scientific organizations as the morale of the scientists has to be kept high in order to keep them motivated and to research and scientific activities. stop the flight of talent from Government organizations involved in this context, the 6th CPC has recommended that the existing scheme of FCS with necessary modifications has to be continued for R&D professionals in all S&T organizations, and the merit based promotion scheme in the Departments of Atomic Energy, Space and DRDO would also need to be persisted with. The Commission has, however, recommended certain features to be incorporated in the existing schemes of FCS and merit based promotion scheme so as to make them more relevant to the context.
2. The recommendations of the Commission have been examined in detail in the context of FCS and a revised comprehensive scheme is enclosed for immediate necessary action by all concerned Ministries and Departments. All the Ministries/departments shall initiate action for review of the provisions of the Flexible Complementing Scheme and amend the provisions of relevant recruitment rules so that the scheme is brought in conformity with the decision/guidelines being conveyed vide this Office Memorandum. Assessment of Scientists from 01.01.2011 shall be done accordingly.
3. The Ministries/Departments may bring the Scheme to the notice of concerned autonomous Organizations under their control for being placed before their respective Governing Bodies."
4. He further submitted that by virtue of the said OM, 80% criteria as stipulated in the earlier Scheme of 1998, has been done away with. He drew attention to Clause (i) of the Criteria for Considering Promotions under the Flexible Complementing Scheme (Annexure-I to the OM), which reads as under:
"(i) Level 1 Screening (Internal) An internal screening committee shall be constituted by the concerned Department for evaluation of annual work reports Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 5 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 vis-a-vis the criteria for up-gradation under FCS. An external member, from Departments of Atomic Energy, Space or 'DRDO who have developed over the years a fine tuned system of screening meritorious Scientists on the basis of ACRs, may be co-opted in the selection process. All scientists eligible according to the provisions of FCS and who meet the benchmark of 'Good' for Scientist C and 'V. Good' for Sc. D and above would be screened in. The internal screening committee would report on the scientific content of work done by the Scientist in part C of the reporting format and same would be made available to the external assessment committee."
5. In contrast, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that the present case is hit by the rule of estoppel as having accepted the promotion without demur or protest, it does not lie in the mouth of the applicant to seek benefits under the garb of the OMs dated 09.11.1998 and 29.11.2002, at a later stage. 5.1 He submitted that as per FCS guidelines issued by DoP&T vide O.M. No. 2/41/97-PPC dated 09.11.1998, promotion of Scientists under FCS is based on the benchmarked performance linked with the period of residency. The process involves clearing two level assessment i.e. Level-I Screening and Level-II Assessment. The Internal Screening Committee (Level-I) would evaluate the ACRs of the eligible officers and will screen in those Scientists who satisfy the minimum residency period linked to their performance, as per the norms laid down in the DoP&T O.M. dated 09.11.1998 read with DoP&T O.M. dated 29.11.2002. According to the norms so prescribed, Scientist 'B' awarded an average score of 85% after 3 year residency, 80% after 4 year residency and 75% after 5 year residency were to be 'Screened in/recommended' at the Level-I stage. The Scientists so Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 6 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 'Screened in/recommended' by the Screening Committee (Level I), shall be further considered by the Assessment Board (Level II). On being recommended by the Assessment Board based on the benchmark linked with residency, the recommended candidates are granted upgradation in terms of the FCS on approval of the Competent Authority.
5.2 The applicants were appointed as Scientist 'B' in NTRO on 24.07.2008 and 26.08.2008, respectively. They completed the prescribed residency period of three years as on 23.07.2011 and 25.08.2011 and became due/eligible for consideration for promotion as Scientist 'C' under FCS w.e.f. the crucial date of 01.01.2012. They were accordingly considered by the Internal Screening Committee (Level I) convened on 27.12.2011. The Committee, after due assessment of their ACRs for the relevant period of residency, i.e. 2008, 2009 and 2010, recommended them not eligible for further consideration by the Assessment Board (Level II), having awarded score less than the prescribed benchmark grading linked to three year residency; and those candidates who were recommended by the Internal Screening Committee (Level I), were further considered by the Assessment Board and on its recommendation, granted in-situ upgradation under FCS.
5.3 Subsequently, both the applicants were considered for promotion as Scientist 'C' under FCS w.e.f. the next crucial date of Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 7 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 01.01.2013, after completion of four years' residency. Both the Internal Screening Committee (Level I) and Assessment Board (Level II), after due assessment of the applicants, recommended them fit for promotion and based on the recommendations and approval of the Competent Authority, they were promoted to the grade of Scientist 'C' under FCS w.e.f. 01.01.2013.
5.4 He submitted that the ACRs for the years 2008, 2009 & 2010 in respect of applicants did not contain any adverse remarks and, as such, copies thereof were not provided to them. He specifically pointed out that as per the earlier FCS notified vide DoP&T OM dated 09.11.1998, for in-situ promotion under FCS, officers attaining an average of certain percentage of marks were screened in for the next level, i.e. Assessment Board.
5.5 He further submitted that in compliance with orders of the Hon'ble Courts, promotion to the eligible and successful candidates have been granted from the date of their eligibility based on the benchmarked grading linked with their residency. 5.6 By placing reliance on the averments made in additional affidavit, the learned counsel for the respondents explained that DoPT vide OM dated 23.07.2009, completely revised system of reporting and nomenclature from ACR to APAR with introduction of new attributes and weightage on a numerical scale of 1-10 making it more transparent and full APARs were to be communicated to all the Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 8 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 employees from the reporting year 2009-10. The new format had to be included in the RRs of the Department and the respondent-NTRO being a notified intelligence organisation, undertook the exercise for revising its ACR forms for various posts and cadres and new format came into effect from 2011; and all the APARs have been communicated from the reporting year 2011 onwards. 5.7 He clarified that FCS 2011 came into effect from 01.01.2011 but this also has to be incorporated into the RRs of the Department which took time. In addition, the Tribunal in O.A. No. 2807/2014 titled Sh. Rajeev Srivastava & Others vs NTRO, vide its order dated 08.05.2015, while dismissing the OA observed that:
"NTRO was a new organization and it took time for the respondents to finalize the seniority lists, RRS etc. as employee had been taken from various stream and as soon as they were able to complete the task, they have taken steps and in facts, 20 out of 25 applicants have already been promoted."
5.8 Further, delayed promotions are neither in the interest of the organization nor advisable for the legitimate career aspirations of the employees. Therefore, pending finalization of RRs and also implementation of the modified FCS, promotions were made in various cadres on the basis of draft RRs/ earlier FCS in vogue. The promotions could not be put on hold because of the delay in framing the RRs. Therefore, the promotions were made on the basis of FCS 1998 only.
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 9 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 5.9 He asserted that the Government instructions/guidelines don't allow grant of promotions from back dates, in cases of FCS also. Further, as per the advice rendered by Solicitor General of India dated 18.01.2016, notified vide DoP&T OM No. CS-14017/6/2017- Estt (RR) dated 03.01.2018, till the final decision of the Apex Court in the case on the issue of antedating of promotion of Scientists, status quo may be maintained, implying no promotion from retrospective date. Promotions earlier granted to the scientists in relaxation of norms were declared as non est and were considered afresh by review committees. Not only the non est promotions reviewed and rectified, after finalization of RRs, no promotion including that in scientific cadre is made from retrospective date. On the basis of Court judgments in some cases of this department and in consultation with DoP&T and Law Ministry, some promotions in the scientific cadre were antedated as one time measure.
5.10 Accordingly, pending amendment of Recruitment Rules and to avoid delay in promotion of eligible Scientists, the Assessment (Level-
1) of the Scientists by the Internal Screening Committee was carried out on 27.12.2011 as per the provision of DoPT OM dated 09.11.1998. The Recruitment Rules for Scientific Cadre in NTRO incorporating provision of revised guidelines issued vide DoPT OM No. AB- 14017/37/2008- Estt (RR) dated 10.09.2010, came into force on 30.03.2012 and, thereafter, all assessment for promotion of Scientific cadre officers was carried out as per revised guidelines for MFCS. Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 10 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 5.11 He also produced the original records in the form of attested copies of the minutes of the Internal Screening Committee, along with the case records, as well as the OMs dated 09.11.1998 and 29.02.2002.
6. In contrast, learned counsel for the applicant drew attention to the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents dated 18.09.2018, highlighting that as regards the benchmark for promotion under FCS, no benchmark such as Good, Very Good, etc., was fixed in DoP&T OM No. 2/41/97-PPC dated 09.11.1998. Instead, for FCS, the percentage of marks was specified according to the years of service in a grade.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties at length and perused the pleadings on record as well as original record produced by the respondents' counsel.
8. Though a direction was issued by this Tribunal on 20.11.2025 while reserving the order, learned counsel for the respective parties could not place on record any citations/judgments relied upon by them in support of their arguments.
9. After carefully considering the submissions made by the respective parties and on a careful perusal of the original record including the minutes of the Internal Screening Committee, it is evident that Internal Screening Committee held on 27.12.2011 for assessing the annual confidential reports of Scientists 'B' & 'C' for Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 11 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 considering them for promotion to the next higher grade under FCS, was duly constituted with three Members including one External Member, i.e. Scientist 'F', DRDO, as per the DoPT's instructions. The Committee assessed 44 Scientist 'B' and 4 Scientist 'C' taking note of FCS guidelines and after examining the ACRs of each Scientist in the categories; Scientist 'B' having 03 years Residency Period with Avg. 85%, having 04 years Residency Period with Avg. 80% & having 05 years Residency Period with Avg. 70%; and Scientist 'C' having 03/04 years Residency Period with Avg. 90/85% & having 06 years Residency Period with Avg. 75%, have been recommended for considering them by the Assessment Board for promotion to the next higher level as per Annexures 'A' to 'E' attached to the minutes of the meeting. As per Annexure "A" in the list of Scientist 'B' with 03 years Residency Period, the applicant No.1 (at S.No.21) and applicant No.2 (at S.No.25) after due assessment of their ACRs for the relevant period of residency, i.e. 2008, 2009 and 2010, having awarded score less than the prescribed benchmark grading linked to 03 years Residency Period, recommended them 'not eligible' for further consideration by the Assessment Board.
10. The record also reveals that the Recruitment Rules for Scientific Cadre in NTRO incorporating provision of revised guidelines issued vide DoPT OM No. AB-14017/37/2008- Estt (RR) dated 10.09.2010, came into force on 30.03.2012. Accordingly, pending amendment of Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30' 12 OA No.535/2015 Item No.60/C4 Recruitment Rules and to avoid delay in promotion of eligible Scientists, the respondent-NTRO conducted the Assessment (Level-I) by the Internal Screening Committee held on 27.12.2011, in accordance with the provisions of DoPT's earlier O.M. dated 09.11.1998 in vogue. This was consistently applied in respect of all categories of Scientist 'B' and 'C' for determining their eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade. Moreover, one External Member from DRDO in the Level-I Internal Screening Committee ensures transparency and impartiality in the process. Therefore, there is no evidence of discrimination, arbitrariness, or biasness in the evaluation of the applicants.
11. In view of above, we are of the considered opinion that the assessments were carried out in a fair, transparent, and unbiased manner, in line with the established guidelines and rules, ensuring equal treatment for all eligible Scientists.
12. Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed due to lack of merit. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
13. The original record shall be returned to the respondents through their counsel in a sealed cover.
(Dr. Anand S. Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/jyoti/
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2025.12.19 10:53:47+05'30'