Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Dr Abdul Aziz Khan vs Mines on 25 September, 2025
1
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 2153/2022
2153/2022,
O.A. No. 2154/2022
2154/2022,
O.A. No. 500/2023
500/2023,
&
O.A. No. 2476/2022
Reserved on: 04.08.2025
Pronounced on: 25.09.2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
O.A. No. 2153/2022
Sri. Rajeshwer Paul,
S/o. Vakilu Ram
Aged about 61 years
Former Deputy Director General
Geological Survey of India
R/o at No. A-402,
A SLV Splendour
Apartment, Harinagar Cross,
Konanakunte, Bangaluru-560062
Bangaluru
... Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
Versus
1. Union of India
By its Secretary,
Ministry of Mines,
Shastry Bhavan,
New Delhi-110
Delhi 001.
2. The Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
27 JL Nehru Road,
New Kolkata-700016.
Kolkata
3. The Deputy Director General (P&A),
Geological Survey of India,
2
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
Ministry of Mines,
27, J L Nehru Road,
New Kolkata-700016.
Kolkata
4. DDG, State Unit:
Karnataka & Goa,
Geolo
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
Kumaraswamy Layout,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560111
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Subhash Gosai)
O.A. No. 2154/2022
Sri. K. Basavaraja,
S/o Kyathaiah,
Aged about 61 years
Former Deputy Director General
Geological Survey of India
R/o at. No.A-401,
No.A
SLV Splendour Apartments,
Harinagar Cross,
Konanakunte,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560 062.
... Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Satish Kumar)
Versus
1. Union of India
By its Secretary,
Ministry of Mines,
Shastry Bhavan,
New Delhi-110
Delhi 001.
2. The Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
27 JL Nehru Road,
New Kolkata-700016.
Kolkata
3
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
3. ADG & Head of Department,
Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
Bandlaguda GSI Post,
Hyderabad
Hyderabad-500068.
4. DDG, State Unit:
Karnataka & Goa,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
Kumaraswamy Layout,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560111
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Subhash Gosai)
O.A. No. 500/2023
1. R. Baskaran,
S/o. Late R. Raju,
Aged about 61 years
Former Addl. Director General
Geological Survey of India
R/o at. No. B. 403,
S.L.N. Apartments,
Harinagar Cross, Konanakunte,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560 062.
2. Sri T. Mullaivendhan,
S/o S.Thambusamy,
Aged about 62 years,
Former Deputy Director General
Geological Survey of India
R/o at. No.40, 2nd Cross,
Vasanthanagar,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560 052
...Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr. Satish Kumar)
Versus
1. Union of India
By its Secretary,
Ministry of Mines,
Shastry Bhavan,
New Delhi-110 001.
4
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
2. The Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
27 JL Nehru Road,
New Kolkata-700016.
Kolkata
3. The Deputy Director General (P&A),
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
27 JL Nehru Road,
New Kolkata-700016.
Kolkata
4. DDG, State Unit:
Karnataka & Goa,
Geological Survey of India,
Ministry of Mines,
Kumaraswamy Layout,
Bengaluru
Bengaluru-560111
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Subhash Gosai)
O.A. No. 2476/2022
Dr. Abdul Aziz Khan,
Aged About 63 years,
S/ o late Abdul Majeed Khan,
R/ o-191
191-A,
A, Hazrat Nizamuddin Colony,
BHEL, Bhopal 4620022 (M.P.)
... Applicant
(Through Advocate: Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath)
Versus
1. Union of India
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Mines,
Shastry Bhavan,
New Delhi-110
Delhi 001.
2. The Director (E-1)
(E
Department of Personnel and
a Training
5
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
Ministry of
of Personnel, Public Grievances aand Pensions,
New Delhi-110001
Delhi
3. Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
27 JL Nehru Road,
Kolkata
Kolkata-700016.
4. Deputy Director General, Geological,
Survey of India, Central Region,
Seminary Hills, GSI Complex,
Nagpur
Nagpur-440006 (M.S.)
5. Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
Operation
Operation-Madhya Pradesh,
E-5,
5, Arera Colony,
Bhopal (M.P.) 462001
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Subhash Gosai)
ORDER
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A) Since a common question of facts and law arises in the present O.As., O.A we have heard these OAs together and they are being disposed of through this common order. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are primarily being extracted from O.A. No. 2153/2022 being the lead case, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
parties
2. The present O.A. hass been filed by the appli applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:-
reliefs:6
Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 "(i)
(i) Issue an order, direction writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to grant NFU to the applicant on completion of one year ear of residency period from 1/04/2017 to 31/03/2018 ( Financial year based vacancy year) as DDG(Geology) and direct the respondents 1 to 3 to grant NFU in the pay scale of Rs.67000 Rs.67000-79000/-
(HAG)(Level-1515 of Pay Matrix Table) to the applicant with effect from om 1/04/2018, the date from which HAG scale under NFU was granted to the juniors of the applicant as per order dated 16/11/2018 with interest and cost of the application.
(ii) Direct the respondents 1 to 3 to grant the consequential benefit for the grant off NFU in the pay scale of Rs.67000 Rs.67000-
79000/-(HAG) (Level-15 15 of Pay Matrix Table) to the applicant w.e.f 1/04/2018 including revised pay fixation to protect applicant's pay parity with the juniors in the post of Deputy Director General(Geology), arrears of salary, lary, leave encashment, revised pension fixation, arrears of revised pension etc in a time bound manner.
(iii) Grant such other relief deemed fit, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant stated that the case of the applicant for grant of Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) was w rejected on the ground that he would be entitled for grant of NFU as per the IAS batch parity for the relevant year. Meaning thereby thereby, the applicant who has been granted seniority in group 'A' in the year 1992 be granted promotion vis-a-vis vis vis that of the IAS officer of 1994 batch.
3.1 He further submitted that the name of the applicant in O.A. No. 2153/2022 2153/2022 in the Civil List of Group 'A' Organised Services, i.e. Geological, Geophysical, Chemical and Engineering Services as on 01.01.2018, 01.01.2018 dated 11.04.2018 is at serial no. 34. 7 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 3.2 He drew our attention to the Office Order dated 29.11.2016, whereby the applicant plicant in OA No. 2153/2022 was promoted as Deputy Director Director General, whereas the persons junior to him were granted the said promotion on 08.02.2017. 3.3 Learned counsel also referred to the recruitment rules, which are annexed with his rejoinder. 3.4 Learned counsel for the applicants further stated that the Learned eligibility for grant of NFU as mentioned in the Recruitment Rules for the post of Additional Director General (Geology) is "Deputy Director General (Geology) with three years of regular service in the Grade; or Officers with twenty twenty-five years' regular service in Group 'A' duty posts in the Service with at least one year regular service in the grade of Deputy Director General (Geology)".
4. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents ondents in support of his arguments has given a comparative chart on the submission urged by the learned counsel for the applicants and his response thereto, which is in consonance with the pleadings made on behalf of the respondents.
4.1 Learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed the fact that the applicant in O.A 2153/2022 came under Central 8 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Organised Group 'A' Services in the year 1992. Vide DoP&T's O.M. dated 24.04.2009 (Annexure-R1), (Annexure R1), the eligibility criteria of NFU for officers officers under Group 'A' is Pay Band Band-3 or Pay Band-4, which reads as under:-
under:
"Consequent upon the acceptance of the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the following orders are issued:
(i) Whenever an Indian Administrative Services Officer of the State of Joint Cadre is posted at the Centre to a particular grade carrying a specific grade pay in Pay band 3 or Pay Band 4, the officers belong to batches of Organised Group A Services that are senior by two_ years or more and have not so far been promo promoted to that particular grade would be granted the same grade on non functional basis from the date of posting of the Indian Ad1ninistrative Service Officers in that particular grade at the Centre.
(ii) Grant of higher scale would be governed by the terms and conditions onditions given in Annex Annex-I.
(iii) Appropriate amendments in the Service Rules may also be carried out.
(iv) Establishment Division of this Department will issue orders from time to time, in consultation with the Establishment Officer, intimating the batch of the officers belonging to the Indian Administrative Service who have been posted at the Centre in the var various grades of PB-3and PB-4 4 as well as the date of posting of the first officers belonging to the batch.
2. Grant of higher scale (i.e. pay band and/or grade -pay) under these instructions would be w.e.f. 1.1.2006, wherever due and admissible.
3. Hindi Version will follow."
4.2 Learned counsel for the respondents further contended that the batch parity cannot be ignored. The seniority granted to the applicant in O.A. No. 2153/2022 in reservation quota by ex-post post facto shall not have the case of the promo promotion, which is mentioned in the comparative chart, the same reads as under:
under:-9
Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 "Shri Rajeshwar Paul joined GSI as Assistant Geologist on 05.07.1988 and got promoted to the post of Geologist (Group-A) A) on 17.11.1992 (1992 batch). As per rule his seniority was clubbed/dovetailed with corresponding - DR batch of 1992 who also joined as Geologist Jr. (GroupA) in GSI in the year 1992.
However, at the time of his promotion in the subsequent grade, i.e., to the post of Senior Geologist by virtue of reservationn (as be belonged to SC category) and reservation was applicable for promotion to Sr. Geologist, at that time vide DOPT O.M. 22011/3/76 22011/3/76- Estt(D) dated 24.12.1980. As he got promoted to the post of sr. Geologist by virtue of his reserved category status he superseded his seniors who belonged to the batches of 1982-1985.
1985. Whereas, he still belonged to the batch of 1992, as batch is fixed at the time of entry in Group-A Service, only.
In terms of DOPT OM NO. AB.14017/64/2008 AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.
(RR) dated 24.04.2009, officers under Cen Central Organised Group A Service are entitled to be granted NFU providing all the prescribed eligibility criteria and promotional norms including benchmark for upgradation to a particular grade pay would have to be fulfilled at the time of screening for grantt of higher pay scale under this orders. For grant of NFU the term batch as well as eligibility are mutually exclusive, i.e. one has to fulfil parity of batch with corresponding IAS batches who are 2 years junior, as well has to fulfil all promotional norm norms including qualifying service/residency in the feeder grade. Relevant NFU Orders corresponding 1994 batches of IAS i.e. applicable to OGAS batch of 1992, has not been issued till date. And Shri Paul has already retired from service 31.12.2018, therefore h he was rightly not considered for benefit of NFU in HAG scale i.e. Level-15 15 grade of 7 CPC, as he or any members of 1992 batch of Geologists in GSI are not eligible. Regarding batch-wise wise parity w.r.t. NFU, it is stated that as per DOPT OM dated 24.04.2009, whenever an IAS officer of the State of Joint Cadre is posted at the Centre to a particular grade carrying a specific grade pay in Pay Band 3 or Pay Band 4, the officers belonging to batches of Organised Group A Services that are senior by two years or mormore and have not so far been promoted to that particular grade would be granted the same grade on non non-functional basis from the date of posting of the IAS officers in that particular grade at the Centre.
The Office Orders dated 16.11.2018 referred by the applicant licant do contain the names of the officers belonging to the batch of 1982 and that of 1982 to 1985 10 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 in parity with IAS batch from 1984 to 1987, in terms of DOPT OMs dated 30.07.2014, 02.09.2015, 11.08.2016 and 14.09.2017 respectively.
Shri Rajeshwar Paul joined oined GSI as Assistant Geologist on 05.07.1988 and got promoted to the post of Geologist (Group-A)A) on 17.11.1992 (1992 batch). As per rule his seniority was clubbed/dovetailed with corresponding DR batch of 1992 who also joined as Geologist Jr. (GroupA) in GSI in the year 1992. Accordingly, he is not entitled to get NFU with the officers of 1982-1985 1985 batches in terms of NFU scheme. Moreover, it may be stated that the parity list in respect of officers of 1992 batch has not been published so far by DoPT and meanwhile, the applicant retired on superannuation on 31.12.2018 Therefore, the submissions made in these paras by the applicant are devoid of merits, hence rejected." 4.3 Learned counsel for the respondents further relied upon para 3 of the comparative chart, which reads as under:
under:-
"As per RRs seniority is not applicable for grant of NFU. Moreover, merely by superseding his seniors in Geologist grade, at the time of promotion to Sr.Geologist, by virtue of reservation only, his "Batch" status of 1992 wil will not change, as Batch is fixed at the time of entry into Group Group-A Service only, which remain permanent throughout the service period. Therefore, his claim of being senior to the officers of 1982-85 85 batch, is misleading and is devoid of Merit.
In terms of DOPTOPT OM NO. AB.14017/64/2008 AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.
(RR) dated 24.04.2009 with a view to grant pay parity between Indian Administrative Service (IAS) Officers and officers of other Organised Group 'A' Services. The officers belong to batches of Organised Group 'A' Service that hat are senior by two years or more and have not so far been promoted to that particular grade would be granted the same grade on non non-
functional basis from the date of posting of the IAS officers in that particular grade at Centre. Such up up-
gradation would not be linked to the vacancies in the grade.
The Office Orders dated 16.11.2018 referred by the applicant do contain the names of the officers belong to the batch of 1982 and that of 1982 to 1985 in parity with IAS batch from 1984 to 1987, in terms of DOPT 11 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 OMs dated 30.07.2014, 02.09.2015, 11.08.2016 and 14.09.2017 respectively.
Shri Rajeshwar Paul joined GSI as Assistant Geologist on 05.07.1988 and got promoted to the post of Geologist (Group-A)A) on 17.11.1992 (1992 batch). As per rule his seniority was clu clubbed/dovetailed with corresponding DR batch of 1992 who also joined as Geologist Jr. (GroupA) in GSI in the year 1992. Accordingly, he is not entitled to get NFU with the officers of 1982-1985 1985 batches in terms of NFU scheme. Moreover, it may be stated that the parity list in respect of officers of 1992 batch has not been published so far by DoPT and meanwhile, the applicant retired on superannuation on 31.12.2018."
5. The learned learned counsel for the applicants stated that the applicant in O.A. No. 2153/2022 was accorded NFU to the post of Director, (Geology) (SG) in the pay band-4 scale of Rs. 37,400 - 67,000/- + G.P. of Rs. 8700/ 8700/- for the year 2011-12 in Geological Survey of India. Thereafter, he was promoted as Deputy Director General (Geology) (Geolog on 21.10.2016, whereas the following persons, who were junior to the applicant applicant, have been given the promotion as Deputy Director General (Geology) at a later stage on 08.02.2017:-
08.02.2017:
Sl. No. Name of the OfficersDate of assumption of Charge
1. Shri Nirdosh Kumar 06
06.02.2017 (FN) Punj
2. Dr. Shabbir Hussain 25.01.2017 (FN)
3. Dr. G Suresh 06.02.2017 (FN)
4. Shri Anil Kumar 06.02.2017 (FN) Gupta 12 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022
6. Learned counsel for the respondents highlighted that as per O.M. dated 16.04.2021, 16.04.2021 the batch party qua the applicant in O.A. 2153/2022 was never ignored, which is reproduced herein below:--
""Reference "Reference is invited to para 1(iv) of this Department OM No.AB.14017/64/2008 No.AB.14017/64/2008-Estt. (RR) dated 24.04.09 regarding Non Non-Functional Upgradation for officers ficers of Organised Group 'A' Services. The details of batch of the officers belonging to the Indian Administrative Service who have been posted at the Centre in various grades were issued from time to time.
2. The details of the batch of IAS officers post posted in the Centre in the grades of Additional Secretary as well as the date of posting of the first officer belonging to the respective batch is indicated in the table below for taking necessary action:"
S. Batch and ACC order Batch of
No. Level in IAS issued on Organised Group
'A' Service to be
considered for
Non-functional
upgradtion.
1. 1994 as 25.03.2021 1992 & earlier
Additional w.e.f. 25.03.2021
Secretary
6.1 He also highlighted para 3 of the additional affidavit, which reads as under:-
under:
"3. That it is submitted that it is clear that officer should hold the office till the effective date with which the IASAS batch is compared. In this case Shri Rajeshwar Paul retired on superannua superannuation on 31.12.2018 whereas the IAS AS batch of 1994 in the Addl. Secretary grade was empanelled at the Center on 25.03.2021, and since he retired on 31.12.2018, he is not eligible for NFU to HAG scale.
scale."
13Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 6.2 Further, learned counsel for the respondents relied upon the Annexure attached to O.M. dated 14.09.2017 (Annexure (Annexure-
R5), which hich shows that the juniors to the applicant have been accorded NFU as per the batch in the level of IAS, which is depicted from the following chart:-
chart:
S. No. Batch and ACC order Batch of Organised Level in IAS issued on Group 'A' Service to be considered for Non-functional upgradtion
1. 2003 as 01.07.2017 2001 and earlier Director w.e.f. 01.07.2017
2. 2008 as 01.07.2017 2006 and earlier Deputy w.e.f. 01.07.2017 Secretary
3. 1987 as 21.7.2017 1985 and earlier Additional w.e.f. 21.7.2017 Secretary
4. 1988 as 21.7.2017 1986 and earlier Additional w.e.f. 21.7.2017 Secretary
7. Learned counsel for the applicant, at this stage stage, opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents and contended that two juniors of the applicant, who are in the grade of Deputy Director General (Geology) have been granted NFU in the pay scale of Rs. 67,000/ 67,000/- to Rs.
79,000/ (HAG) (level-15 79,000/- 15 of pay Matrix) w.e.f. 01.04.2018. He added that organised services qua the applicant came into existence on 29.09.2010, which is apparent from the Recruitment Rules itself.
14Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 7.1 Learned counsel for the applicant also highlighted the hierarchy in terms of the promotional avenues qua the applicant in schedule-I, schedule I, which is as follows:
follows:-
Sl. Grade of duty Name of Number Pay band and grade No. post the duty (sanctioned pay or pay scale post strength) of duty posts (5) Pay band Grade pay (1) (2) (3) (4) 5(a) 5(b)
1. Higher Additional 2 HAG -
Administrative Director Rs.67000-
Grade General 79000/-
(Geology) (Geology)
(HAG)
2. Senior Deputy 30 PB-4 Rs.
Administrative Director Rs. 37400 10000/--
Grade General -67000/-
(Geology) (Geology)
(HAG)
3. Non-Functional Director
Non Upto thirty PB-4 Rs.
Selection Grade (Geology) percent of Rs. 37400 8700/-
(Geology) the senior -67000/-
duty posts
(that is posts
in Senior
Time Scale
and above)
7.2 Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on
the order/judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UOI & Ors. vs Shri C.R. Madhava Murthy and Anr.
Anr., (2022) 3 SCR 22.
8. The gist of the written submissions filed by Mr. Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant in O.A. No. 15 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 2153/2022 is that the applicant, an officer of the 1992 batch in the Geology Stream of the Geological Survey of India (GSI), seeks grant of Non-Functional Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) to the Higherr Administrative Grade (HAG) pay scale (Rs. 67,000 67,000- 79,000 / Level-15 Level 15 of the Pay Matrix) with effect from 01.04.2018. The claim is based on the fact that several junior officers, including Mr. Nirdosh Nirdosh Kumar Punj and Dr. Shabbir Hussain, were granted the said said NFU from the same date, despite the applicant being senior to them in both grade and service. It is submitted that the Geology Stream of GSI was accorded the status of an Organized Group 'A' Service only from 29.09.2010 vide Recruitment Rules (RRs) notif notified on the same date (G.S.R. 787(E)). Prior to this, the service was governed under General Central Service (GCS) R Rules, wherein batch parity and the original UPSC batch concept were inapplicable due to vacancy-based vacancy and non-selection selection mode of promotions, often ften resulting in distortion of batch batch-wise seniority. The applicant was promoted to the post of Senior Geologist (STS) on 15.09.1999 15.09.199 and subsequently to Deputy Director General (Geology) on 03.11.2016 ahead of his juniors juniors, who were later promoted in 2017. His seniority over the said officers was settled, undisputed, and consistently reflected in the department's own records, including gradation lists and earlier NFU orders issued by the Respondent. Hence, the denial of 16 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 NFU to the applicant w.e.f. 01.04.2018 while granting the same benefit to his juniors is, is therefore therefore, arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the respondent's respondent's reliance on the DoPT's "original batch concept" to eexclude the applicant is factually and legally untenable, as the said concept was not applicable to the Geology Stream prior to 29.09.2010. The eligibility for NFU under the RRs notified in 2010 is to be determined based on settled seniority as on the date of notification, not on batch parity from pre pre-organized service days. The Respondent has previously submitted before various judicial forums that batch concept could not be strictly applied under the pre-2010 pre 2010 GCS framework due to inter inter-se seniority changes and the absence of unified cadre structure. Accordingly, it is submitted that the applicant, having completed the required qualifying service of 25 years in Group 'A' and one year of regular service in the SAG grade as of 01.04.2018, is fully eligible for NFU to the HAG scale from the said date. The refusal to extend this benefit to him, despite extending the same to his juniors with inferior seniority, is unjust and deserves to be set aside aside. Therefore, the applicant prayed for grant of NFU in the HAG scal scale with effect from 01.04.2018, along with interest and all consequential benefits. 17 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022
9. In the written submission filed on behalf of the applicant in O.A. No. 2476/2022 by Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, learned counsel it is submitted that the applicant joined the Geological counsel, Survey of India on 13.11.1972 as Assistant Geologist (Class (Class-II) through the Geologists Examination, 1971 conducted by UPSC. Thereafter, on 13.08.1974, he was selected as Geologist (Jr.) (Class-I) I) through the Geologists Examination, 1973. He continued tinued to serve with distinction and was promoted to the post of Director on 21.06.2002, and further promoted to Director (Selection Grade) with effect from 03.02.2005 on the basis of merit and performance. After rendering 35 years of unblemished service, the applicant superannuated on 31.10.2008. Meanwhile, the 6th Central Pay Commission came into effect on 01.01.2006, and subsequently, the Department of Personnel and Training issued an Office Memorandum dated 24.04.2009, introducing the scheme of Non Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) for for officers of organized Group 'A' services in PB-3 3 and PB-4.
PB 4. In pursuance thereof, several juniors to the applicant pplicant were extended the benefit of NFU. Notably, on 22.03.2011, Mr. O.P. Joshi and Mr. M.R M.R. Shah, who were junior to the he applicant, applicant, were granted NFU with effect from 03.01.2006. Similarly, Mr. Mohd. Kamal Kazim (seniority list no. 351), junior to the applicant (seniority list no. 135), was also granted NFU though he retired on 31.10.2008, i.e. the very 18 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 same date on which the applicant retired. The applicant, however, was denied the benefit on the pretext that he became eligible only from 01.10.2010, i.e. after his retirement. It is submitted that this action of the Competent Authority is wholly arbitrary, discriminatory, and and vindictive, as it singles out the applicant while extending the same benefit to juniors, including those retiring on the same date. Aggrieved, the applicant submitted a representation on 11.10.2011, requesting fixation of his pay in accordance with the NFU scheme and seeking parity with his juniors. However, the said representation was rejected on 07.06.2012, without assigning any valid or cogent reasons. The denial of NFU to the applicant, pplicant, despite his fulfilling all the requisite eligibility conditions, is unjust and unsustainable. It is further submitted that the applicant is entit entitled to NFU in the Grade Pay of Rs.10,000/-
Rs. from 03.01.2006, in terms of the DoP&T T notification and by drawing parity with IAS officers of the Joint State Cadre posted at the C Centre as on that date and the arbitrary denial of such benefit to the applicant, while extending it to his juniors, including those who retired on 31.10.2008, clearly violates the principles of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
10. In the written submission filed on behalf of the respondents by Mr. Subhash Gosai, learned counsel counsel, it is submitted that the applicants in these matters seek grant of 19 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Non-Functional Functional Upgradation (NFU) in the HAG scale (Level (Level-
15) from an earlier date, claiming pari parity with other officers who were granted such benefit. However, the reliefs sought are not admissible. As per DoPT OM dated 24.04.2009, NFU is to be granted only when the concerned IAS batch two years junior has been en posted in a particular grade and, further, the officer concerned must also fulfill all prescribed eligibility conditions and promotional norms including the required residency and benchmark at the time of screening. Thus, batch parity and eligibility conditions are both mandatory for grant of NF NFU. It is submitted that batch seniority in Organized Group 'A' Services is fixed at the time of entry into Group Group-A and cannot be altered by virtue of subsequent promotions, even if those promotions were obtained earlier by way of reservation or other facto factors.
Officers of earlier batches who were granted NFU received it strictly in parity with corresponding IAS batches, based on DoP&T OMs issued from time to time. For the batch to which the applicants belong, the corresponding parity list with the IAS was issued sued only after their retirement and and, accordingly, no officer of that batch in the organization has been granted NFU in HAG scale during the relevant period. Further, though some of the applicants may have completed the qualifying residency period, they were were not within the zone of consideration for promotion to the next higher post during the relevant vacancy 20 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 year. The Department has consistently followed the DoP&T guidelines and uniformly granted NFU as and when due, and orders have already been issued gra granting NFU in the appropriate lower grades to all eligible officers, including the applicants.
pplicants. However, the claim for NFU in the HAG scale from an earlier date is factually incorrect and legally untenable, since the batch parity was not declared during thei their service tenure.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the pleadings available on record as well as written synopsis filed by them.
12. It is noted that the refusal to grant the applicant the relief(s)
(s) sought for, is primarily based on the following grounds:
(i) According to law and the relevant DoP&T OM dated 24.04.2009, IAS batch parity cannot be disregarded for granting Non-Functional Non Functional Upgradation (NFU). Since the applicant (O.A. No. 2153/2022) was promoted to Geologist (Group-A) (Group A) on 17.11.1992, he is considered aas a 1992 batch officer as per rules rules. Therefore, he is not entitled for the same and granting NFU to the applicant with the Group-A Group A batches of 1982 1982-1985 would violate the provisions of the the DoP&T OM dated 24.04.2009.
(ii) Shri Rajeshwar Paul joined GSI as Assistant Geologist on 05.07.1988 and got g promoted to the post of Geologist 21 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 (Group A) on 17.11.1992 (seniority dovetailed with 1992 (Group-A) batch). Subsequently, his promotion the post of Senior Geologist was materialized by virtue of reservation and, accordingly, he superseded his seniors belong belonging to the batches of 1982 -1985 1985 in the grade of Senior Geologist and onwards.
(iii) NFU is granted based on IAS batch parity and fulfillment of promotional norms. Three officers from the 1982 batch received NFU according to their batch and norms. Their joining details show they entered GSI as Geologists before Shri Rajeshwar Paul and are are, therefore, not junior to him in that grade.
(iv) Initially, three officers were not junior to Shri Rajeshwar Paul in the Geologist grade; they were senior. However, Shri Rajeshwar Paul belonged to SC category and was promoted to Senior Geologist by virtue of reservation before the other three office officers. Although they lagged behind in seniority, all four officers were promoted to Superintending Geologist and Director (G) in 2011, completing their residency/qualifying service for promotion to DDG DD (G) on 01.04.2016 01.04.2016. Furthermore, for granting Non-Functional Non al Upgradation (NFU) to a higher 22 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 grade, in addition to maintaining IAS batch parity and fulfilling all promotional norms, a fundamental principle is that the officer must substantively hold the feeder grade post.
(v) The department has maintained uniformity in granting NFU to all grades, conforming to Govt. of India/DoP&T instructions/guidelines.
(vi) There is a distinction between seniority and gradation lists. A seniority list is considered more important, as it directly impacts career progress progression and benefits related to length of service. Seniority lists determine an employee's position in the hierarchy based on their date of hire or appointment, crucial for promotions and other decisions. Gradation lists reflect performance or qualifications, often used for merit-based promotions or selection for specific roles. As per rules, seniority is not applicable for grant of NFU 12.1 From a perusal of the pleadings, it is undisputed that three officers junior(s) to the applicant in OA No. 2153/22 were directly recruited as Geologists in 1983, whereas the applicant was appointed as Assistant Geologist under the Direct Recruitment quota, effective from 05.07.1988. A comparative 23 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 chart indicating their dates of appointment/promotion/grant of NFU and seniority seniority position is as under:
Sr Designation/ Rajeshwar Paul Nirdosh Kumar Punj No. Date of Date of Appointment/ Appointment/ Promotion/NFG/Seniori Promotion/NFG/ ty Position Seniorty Position 1 Assistant Geol. 05.07.1988 NA 2 Geol. 17.11.1992 12.08.1983 3 Sr Geol. with 15.09.1999 22.02.2011 Grade Pay of 6600/-
4. Grant of NFUG in the grade of 05.04.2007 1/07/2008 Senior Geol. ( seniority at Serial (seniority at Serial with Pay Band of No.284) No.297) 7600/- Vide DOPT OM dated 24.04.2009
5. Supdt Geol. 02.05.2011 25.05.2011
6. Director (G) 23.05.2011 26.05.2011 NFUG
7. Grant of NFG 01.04.2016 01.04.2016 from PB-13 to (seniority seniority at Serial (seniority at Serial PB 14 No.98) No.111)
8. Dy DG (G) 24.10.2016 06.02.2017 (seniority at Serial (seniority list at Serial No.45) No.57) Date of Promotion Date of Promotion 03.11.2016 06.02.2017
9. Civil List of (seniority seniority at Serial (seniority at Serial Group A as on No.34) No.44) 1.1.2018 12.2 The above chart depicts depict that the applicant in OA No.2153/2022 was accorded NFU w.e.f. 05.04.2007 in terms of OM dated 24.04.2009
24. 4.2009 for officers working in Organized Group 'A' Services on accepted conditions stipulated therein with Pay Band of 7600/-
7600/ placing him above o others at Serial no.284, whereas on similar lines, Shri Nirdosh Kumar Punj who was junior at Serial Serial No.297 was accorded said be benefit at a later date, i.e., only on 1.7.2008. However, ver, merely by superseding his 24 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 seniors in Geologist grade, at the time of promotion to Sr. Geologist, by virtue of reservation only, his "Batch" status of 1992 will not change, which Batch is fixed as per the date of entry into Group-A Group A Service only and remain permanent throughout the service period. Therefore, his claim of being senior to the officers of of 1982-85 85 batch is misplaced.
12.3 In terms of Notification dated 29.
29.09.2010, the respondents pondents notified the Ministry o of Mines, Central Geological Service Group 'A' Rule, 2010. The extracts of 2010 Rule Rules relevant for the present purpose are being re re-produced here-
under :-
:
"2.....(g) "grade" means a grade of a duty post specified in column 2 of Schedule 1;
(h) "regular service" in relation to any grade, means the period of service in that grade rendered after appointment thereto on a regular basis and includes any period -
(i) taken into account for purpose of seniority in the case of those already in that grade at the time of commencement of these rules;
(ii) during which an officer would have held a duty post in that grade but for being on leave or otherwise not being available for holding such post."
"3. Constitution of Service.
(1) On and from the date of commencement of these rules, the Geology stream of the Geological Survey of India, a Central Organised Group 'A' Service is hereby constituted as "the Ministry of Mines, Central Geological Service Group 'A'.
(2) On the date of commencement of these rules, the Service shall consist of persons who have already been appointed on a regular basis to duty posts of Geological Survey of India in Geolog Geology stream namely, Senior Deputy Director General (Operations), Deputy 25 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Director General (Geology), Director (Geology) (Non (Non-
Functional Selection Grade), Director (Geology), Geologist (Senior) and Geologist (Junior), (3) Thereafter the Service shall consist o of persons appointed to the Service in terms of these rules. (4) For the officers referred to in sub sub-rule 2, the regular service rendered before the commencement of these rules, shall be taken into account as regular service for seniority, confirmation, pr promotion, pension, etc. (5) All the duty posts in the Service, as specified in Schedule I, shall be classified as Group 'A' posts."
"8. Seniority. (1) The seniority of members of the Service appointed before the commencement of these rules, to any grade orr duty post, shall be governed by their relative seniority in the respective grade or duty post immediately before the date of the commencement of these rules:
Provided that if the seniority of any such member had not been determined on the said date, the same shall be determined on the basis of the rules as were applicable to such member before the commencement of these rules.
(2) The seniority of persons appointed to the Service, after the commencement of these rules, in any grade or duty post shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of these rules.
(3) The fixation of inter-se se seniority between the direct recruits and the officers promoted to the Junior Time Scale shall be done on pro pro-rata basis in the ratio of three direct recruit against one promotee.
(4) Where juniors who have completed their qualifying or eligibility service are being considered for promotion, their seniors shall also be considered provided they are not short of the requisite qualifying or eligibility service by more tthan half of such qualifying or eligibility service or two years, whichever is less, and have successfully completed their probation period for promotion to the next higher grade along with their juniors who have already completed such qualifying or eligibi eligibility service.
(5) In cases not covered by sub sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2), the seniority shall be determined by the Controlling Authority in consultation with the Commission"26
Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 12.4 We have also taken note of the DoP&T's clarifications dated 11.11.2010 regarding regarding the grant of NFU. Serial No Nos. 12, 13 and 15 of the same read as under:-
12 Can a General/OBC No. A General/OBC categ category officer category Government promoted through a later DPC will be servant promoted placed junior to the SC/ST category through a later DPC Government servant promoted regain his seniority of through earlier DPC even though by the feeder grade on virtue of rule of reservation.
promotion to higher grade? O.M. No. 22011/1/2001 22011/1/2001-Estt.(D) 21.01.2002 13 What is co-relation There is no co co-relation between between seniority in a seniority in a grade and the grade and reservation reservatio reservation roster for the said grade. roster for other grade? Seniority of an officer is determined OR as per order of merit given by UPSC Whether a candidate is or selecting authority or panel of placed in the seniority promotion given by DPC. A list of a grade, as per reservation roster/points are meant his position in the only for identifying the vacancy that reservation roster or goes to a particul particular category of vice-versa? officer.
15 How year of The year of availability, both in case availability in regard to of direct recruit as well as promotee, determination of for the purpose of rotation and relative seniority of fixation of seniority is actual date of direct recruits and appointment after declaration of promotee is result/selection and completion of determined? pre-recruitment recruitment formalities, as prescribed. The year of availability is a vacancy year in which a candidate of a particular batch of selected direct recruitment or an officer of a particular batch of promotee joins the post/service.
O.M. No. 22011/1/2006 22011/1/2006-Estt.(D) dated 03.03.2008 12.5 It would be pertinent to note the consolidated guidelines issued by the Govt. of India, Department of Personnel and Training on the subject 'Non-Functional Functional Upgradation' in respect of Organised Group 'A' Services (As on 06.09.2022). 27 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Clausess xii, xiii & xiv of para 4 of the consolidated guidelines read as under:
"xii) The term 'Batch' used in para '2' above, relates to the year of joining the service. For the purpose of grant of NFU the 'Batch' for directly recruited officers of OGAS in the grade in which the they have been appointed in the service, shall be the year following the year in which competitive exam was held. In subsequent grades, the 'Batch' would remain the same provided the officer is not superseded due to any reason. In case an officer is supersede superseded, the officer would be considered along with the 'Batch' of these officers with whom his seniority is fixed. [FAQ No. 7 of O.M. No. AB.14017/47/2011 AB.14017/47/2011- Estt. (RR) dated 1.8.2012]
xiii) Benefit of NFU is admissible to those who have been directly recruited to the OGAS as well as promotees, who have been inducted in the OGAS. In case of such promotees, who have been inducted in the OGAS, for the purpose of grant of NFU, the 'Batch' would be the batch of the directly recruited officers, with whom their seniorityty is clubbed. [FAQ No. 2 of O.M. No. AB.14017/64/2011 AB.14017/64/2011-Estt. (RR) dated 25.9.2009] xiv. As per the terms and conditions prescribed for grant of NFU, all the eligibility criteria and promotional norms including 'benchmark' for upgradation to a particular pa pay scale/ pay level would have to be met at the time of screening for grant of higher pay scale/ level under these orders. [FAQ No. 6 of O.M. No. AB.14017/47/2011 AB.14017/47/2011-Estt. (RR) dated 1.8.2012]"
12.6 Furthermore, in light of the aforesaid clarifications, we also find that even though it has been stipulated for the grant of Non-Functional Functional Upgradation (NFU) on the basis of clause (i) of the O.M. No. AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.
AB.14017/64/2008 Estt. (RR) dated 24.
24.04.2009, going by the analogy of the clarifications, the said grant of NFU 28 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 and clause (i) has to be interpreted when the IAS officer of State or joint cadre is posted at the Centre and the officers belonging to the batch of organized group services are senior by two years orr more. Therefore, the date of posting of the IAS officer in that particular grade at the Centre is to be seen. 12.7 Grant of NFU is not dependent upon the availability of vacancies, which is the case in promotion, but higher up up-
gradation is provided that that one fulfills the parameters of the next promotion in hierarchy.
12.8 The Non-Functional Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) corresponding to Level-15 Level 15 was granted to juniors of the applicant(s) effective as on 16.11.2018, not only in accordance accordance with the OM dated 24.04.2009 .2009 but also under Rule 8 of the 2010 Rules. It cannot be inferred that Shri Nirdosh Kumar Punj, appointed in 1983, was assigned an IAS batch prior to 1992. If the respondents' submissions were accepted, linking the grant of NFU to the conditions stipulated stipulated in OM dated 24.
24.04.2009 vis-à-vis the IAS batch, the applicant should not have received the NFU benefit. 12.9 It is undisputed that both the applicant(s) and Shri Nirdosh Kumar Punj were inducted into the respondents' services under the 1967 Rules, notified on 04.06.1969. Due to the he applicant's accelerated promotion (personal to the individual) to Geologist in 1992, 1992, he got an edge over others.
29Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 However, he could not get NFU as he retired on superannuation on 31.12.2018, 31.12.2018 whereas the IAS batch of 1994 in the Addl. Secretary grade was empanelled at the Center on 25.03.2021, but his juniors got the benefit of NFU as they were in service on the crucial date.
12.10 Itt is pertinent to mention that iin terms of point 5 of the DoPT OM No. AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) Estt.(RR) dated 25.09.2009 and point 11 of the FAQs dated 01.08.2012, the retired officers who are re otherwise eligible as on due date shall be considered for the benefit of pay upgradation. The same is reiterated by the DoPT vide vide OM No. AB.14017/30/2011 AB.14017/30/2011-PP.(RR) Vol.III dated 19.08.2024, Para 4 of which clearly stipulates that the officers belonging to OGAS, who are at least two batches senior to the batch of the IAS officers and who are otherwise eligible and fulfill the eligibility eligibility conditions for promotion including completing of prescribed eligibility service in the respective feeder grades, as on the crucial date of eligibility for promotion to the above grades, but have not been granted promotion to these grades, shall be elig eligible to be considered for grant of NFU.
NFU 12.11 Further, the DoPT vide recent OM dated 26.05.2025 issued the following instructions regarding Non Non-Functional 30 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Upgradation for Officers of Organized Group 'A' Services, which reads as under:
12.12 The T concept of NFU does not ext extend post-retirement benefits to give them pay parity with juniors who might have received it after retirement, retirement, as contended by the applicant in terms of the Apex Court's decision in Shri C.R. Madhava 31 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 Murthy and Anr. (supra). However, ver, the eligibility for NFU is determined based on service-specific service specific criteria and eligibility dates while the officer is still in service
13. In view of the foregoing discussion discussion, though Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) is a benefit applicable to serving officers in Organized Group 'A' Services (OGAS), the retired officers who were at least two batches senior to the batch of the IAS officers and who were otherwise eligible and fulfil the eligibility conditions for promotion including completing of prescrib prescribed eligibility service in the respective feeder grades, as on the crucial date of eligibility for promotion to the above grades, but have not been granted promotion to these grades, shall be eligible and needs to be considered for grant of NFU.
Accordingly, we are of the considered view that if the applicants were eligible and fulfil the eligibility conditions as on their respective dates of retirement as stipulated by the DoPT, already mentioned hereinabove, they hey should also be considered for grant of the benefit of NFU.
14. As a result, result, the respondents are directed to re re-convene the Review Screening Committee qua the applicants in all these OAs and re--examine the cases of each applicant. The respondents shall pass appropriate appropriate orders on the basis of the outcome of 32 Item No. 1/C-V V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023 and 2476/2022 such Review Screening Committee with respect to each of the applicant thereafter, under applicants der intimation to the applicants. Those applicant who will be found eligible as on the date of their applicants retirement subject to their meeting the eligibility criteria as on retirement, the respective crucial dates but have not been granted promotion to these grades, the respondents shall accord them the benefit of Non-Functional Non Functional Upgradation from their respective due dates, dates with all consequential benefits benefits. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
15. With the above directions, all the above O.As. are disposed of. Pending MAs, if any, shall aalso stand disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(Dr. Anand S Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/jyoti/
33
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
Batch Parity is Based on Entry into Group-A Group Service (Not Subsequent Promotions) Rule: As per DoPT OM dated 24.04.2009, 24.04.2009, NFU is strictly linked to IAS batch parity. Explanation:: Shri Rajeshwar Paul was inducted into Group Group-A service as Geologist on 17.11.1992,, thus fixing his batch as 1992. Conclusion:: His promotion to higher posts ahead of 1982 1982-1985 batch officers due to reservation does not alter his batch for NFU.
2. Promotion Through Reservation Does Not Affect NFU Batch Fixation Clarification from DoPT (FAQ No. 12):
12): A reserved category officer ppromoted earlier does not become senior in batch to others promoted later.
Reservation vs Seniority:
Seniority: The promotion roster based on reservation does not determine batch or seniority for NFU.
3. NFU is Not Based on Supersession or Performance But on Batch + Eligibility Criteria for NFU:
NFU o IAS batch parity (officer at Centre must be 2 batches junior). o Fulfillment of promotional norms,, including substantive holding of feeder post.
o Completion of qualifying service. Not Merit-Based Based: NFU is not about performance,, bbut about parity and structure.
4. Clarification on Seniority vs Gradation Lists Seniority list governs career progression and promotions. Gradation list may be used for administrative or merit purposes. NFU is not governed by gradation or supersession bu but strictly by batch and DoPT norms.
5. Past NFU Dates Confirm Correct Application of Rules Chart clearly shows:
o Shri Rajeshwar Paul was granted NFU in 2007 2007. o Officer Shri Nirdosh Kumar Punj, though promoted later, was batch 1983 and got NFU later in 2008.
o Despite Paul's functional supersession of Punj, NFU was given as per batch- wise eligibility, eligibility not functional seniority.
Statutory/Rule Backing:
Central Geological Service Group 'A' Rules, 2010:2010
o Batch fixation and regular service is defined and tied to entry into the grade on regular basis.
basis
34
Item No. 1/C-V
V O.A. Nos. 2153/2022, 2154/2022, 500/2023
and 2476/2022
DoPT Clarifications:
Clarifications
o Batch = Year of joining the OGAS in Group-A Group A grade.
o Supersession via reservation doesn't change batch for NFU.
✅Correct Position of Law (as upheld):
Parameter Clarification Batch Fixed at the time of entry into Group Group-A (Geologist).
Reservation-based early Does not change batch for NFU.
promotion Only when officer's batch parity with IAS is triggered triggered, and officer NFU Entitlement meets all promotional norms.
Post-retirement NFU Allowed if eligibility was met before retirement.
Claim based on being Not valid for NFU purposes.
functionally senior Key Case Law Distinction:
C.R. Madhava Murthy case related to stepping up of pay pay, not NFU. Thus, not applicable to Rajeshwar Paul's case.
Final Observations:
Shri Rajeshwar Paul's NFU claim against 1982-1985 1985 batch is legally untenable. His functional seniority due to reservation does not translate to batch seniority for NFU purposes.
The department's consistent application of DoPT rules has been upheld as non-
discriminatory and rule-compliant.
Conclusion:
Rajeshwar Paul is not entitled to NFU parity with 1982-85 85 batch officers, as his batch is rightly fixed as 1992.. His earlier promotion under reservation doesn't override the DoPT- mandated principles of batch-based batch based NFU. The rejection of his claim appears legally sound and supported by statutory rules, DoPT clarifications, and past precedents precedents.