Karnataka High Court
Central Silk Board vs Dr. G S Geetha on 17 April, 2026
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 3935 OF 2021 (S-CAT)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 4963 OF 2021 (S-CAT)
IN WP NO. 3935/2021
BETWEEN:
1. CENTRAL SILK BOARD
(ESTABLISHED BY THE MINISTRY OF TEXTILE,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA),
CSB, COMPLEX, BTM LAYOUT,
MADIWALA, BANGLAORE-560068,
REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (LAW).
2. THE UNION OF INDIA
REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF MINISTRY OF TEXTILE,
UDYOG BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI -110001.
Digitally signed by
NANJUNDACHARI 3. THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
Location: HIGH AND TRAINING
COURT OF REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO
KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS
NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MADHUKAR M DESHPANDE, CGSC)
AND:
DR. G S GEETHA
W/O. P NATARAJA,
R/AT NO.39, BLOCK 22,
1ST MAIN ROAD,
-2-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
MADHUVANA LO,
SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE,
MYSORE - 570023.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M ARUNA SHYAM, SR. ADV. FOR
SMT. SHILPA S GOGI, ADV. FOR R1)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
O.A.NO.170/1387/2018 ON THE FILE OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
27.08.2019 PASSED IN O.A.NO.170/1387/2018 ON THE FILE OF
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH AND
DISMISS THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN O.A.NO.170/1387/2018
ANNEXURE-A.
IN WP NO. 4963/2021
BETWEEN:
1. CENTRAL SILK BOARD
CSB COMPLEX
100 FEET ROAD
BMT LAYOUT, MADIWALA
BENGALURU-560068.
2. UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF TEXTILES
UDYOG BHAVAN
MAULANA AZAD ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110001.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MADHUKAR M DESHPANDE, CGSC)
AND:
DR. KUMARESAN P
S/O PERIASWAMY S
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT FLAT NO.4
SRI SAI KRUPA APARTMENTS
NO.9, 36TH MAIN, 4TH A CROSS,
BTM 1ST STAGE
BENGALURU-560068.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. DESHRAJ, ADV. FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT)
-3-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
O.A.NO.170/1282/2018 ON THE FILE OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH AND SET ASIDE ORDER DATED
05.12.2019 PASSED IN O.A.NO.170/1282/2018 BY THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, AND
DISMISS THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN OA.NO.170/1282/2018
ANNEXURE-A.
THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
ORDER ON 18.03.2026 COMING ON THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J.,
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
CAV ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
The Central Silk Board and Union of India are before
this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
questioning the orders passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru (For
short, 'CAT'), dated 27.08.2019 in O.A.No.170/1387/2018
and order dated 05.12.2019 in O.A.No.170/01282/2018
allowing the respondent's applications directing to treat
the respondent who was applicant before the CAT as
eligible to be treated as Scientist and eligible for Flexible
Complementary Scheme (for short, 'FCS') with other
consequences.
-4-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
2. Brief facts leading to the impugned orders are
that, the respondent in W.P.No.3935/2021 possesses the
qualification of B.A., with Master's Degree in Social Works
and Ph.D (Sociology). The respondent was appointed as
Senior Research Assistant (Social Science). By Office
Memorandum dated 10.09.1991, the respondent was
appointed as Senior Research Assistant (Social Sciences)
and was given promotion to the next higher cadre of
Scientist-C from Scientist-B in the pay scale of
Rs.10,000/- to 15,000/- w.e.f. 03.09.2006, the date on
which she completed five years of service as Scientist-B by
order dated 28.04.2007 (Annexure-R10). Subsequently,
vide intimation dated 08.07.2014 (Annexure-A14), the
respondent was informed that she was not entitled for in-
situ promotion under FCS on the ground that the CSB
officials with Social Science background will not fall within
the ambit of Science and Technology and FCS is available
only to scientists and engineers with specific qualification.
-5-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
3. In W.P.No.4963/2021, the respondent was
appointed as Assistant Director (Sericulture Management)
in the year 1991 and the respondent possesses the
qualification of B.Sc., (Agriculture) Masters of Business
Management and Ph.D., in Economics. This respondent
was also extended in-situ promotion to the post of
Scientist-C w.e.f. 30.08.2006 by order dated 28.04.2007
and to the post of Scientist -D w.e.f. 01.07.2009 by order
dated 09.07.2009 in terms of the FCS.
4. The Petitioner No.2 - Ministry of Personnel and
Public Grievances and Pensions, by OM dated 09.11.1998,
introduced the FCS for scientists in various scientific
departments on the recommendations of the 5th Central
Pay Commission. The FCS scheme was made applicable
only to scientists and technologists holding scientific posts
in scientific and technology departments and who are
engaged in scientific activities and services. The OM also
laid down the criteria for identifying the institutions and
organizations as scientific and technological institutions, as
well as for defining scientific activities and services. The
-6-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
above OM also defines scientific activities and services,
which reads as follows:
"Criteria for identifying Institutions/Organisations
as Scientific and Technical Institutions and
definition of Activities and Services, Scientists &
Engineers and Scientific Posts:
i) The institutions referred to as S & T would be
characterized by pursuit of excellence;
ii) They should be engaged in research, design,
development or programme implementation
(including review, analysis, promotion and aspects
of science policy, etc.) which would cover a broad
spectrum of pure and applied research but the
essential feature would be innovative character and
spirit of enquiry that permeates their overall
functioning.
iii) The scientific culture is characterized by a few
salient aspects, namely the persons involved are
highly qualified and skilled technical personnel,
involved in creative and innovative activity, they
are willing to be judged on the basis of merit and
competence rather than on the basis of seniority
and a hierarchical structure.
iv) The criteria could cover the aims and objectives
of the institution/organization, qualifications of the
personnel qualitative requirements for performance
of various types of activities, etc,.
Further, it also defined scientists and engineers and also
scientific post which reads as follows:
"Scientists and Engineers: persons,
(a) who possess academic qualification of atleast
Masters Degree in Natural/Agricultural Sciences
-7-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
or Bachelor's Degree in
Engineering/Technology/medicine; and
(b) working in those capacities, use or create
scientific knowledge, and engineering and
technological training who are engaged in
professional work on S & T activities, high level
administrators and personnel who plan, direct
or coordinate the execution of S & T activities."
Thereafter, on the recommendation of the 6th Central Pay
Commission, FCS was modified under OM dated
10.09.2010. In terms of the modified FCS, scientific
activities and services were defined. It also defined
scientific posts as well as scientists and engineers, which
reads as follows:
"SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL AITERIA FOR
IDENTIFYING INSTITUTIONS AS SCIENTIFIC AND
TECHNICAL.
• The institutions referred to as S & T would be
characterized by pursuit of the excellence;
• They should be involved in creating new
scientific knowledge of innovative engineering,
technological of medical techniques or which
predominantly involved in professional research
and development work.
• The scientific culture is characterized by a few
salient aspects, namely the persons involved are
highly qualified and skilled technical personnel,
involved in creative and innovative activity, they
are willing to be judged based on the basis of
-8-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
merit and competence rather than on the basis
of seniority and a hierarchical structure;
• The criteria could cover the aims and objectives
of the institution/organization, qualifications of
the personnel, qualitative requirements for
performance of various types of activities etc.
Scientific Activities and Services
(a) Fundamental/basic research: Original investigation
to gain new scientific knowledge, not necessarily
directed towards any specific practical aim or
application; Working in scientific laboratories/
institutes, period spent on doctoral/post doctoral
degrees in basic research after joining an organization,
etc. would constitute field experience for the purpose
of FCS.
(b) Applied Research: Original investigation to gain
new scientific or technical knowledge directed towards
a specific practical aim or objective: Working in
scientific laboratories/ institutes, period spent on
doctoral/ post doctoral degrees in applied research
after joining an organization etc. would constitute field
experience for the purpose of FCS.
(c) Experimental Development: Application of scientific
knowledge directed towards producing new or
substantially improved materials, devices, products,
processes, systems or services; 'field experience'
would depend on the work profile of the Department.
The defining factor would be that the work is not of
routine use of scientific knowledge but involves
application of scientific knowledge for creation of
new/innovative systems, practices, models.
(d) S&T activities which are directly linked to R & D in
terms of promoting the scientific activities and
services. Working in R & D laboratories and
-9-
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
institutions, scientific projects being operated in
mission mode, working on international collaboration R
& D projects etc. would constitute the filed experience
under FCS.
Scientific Post
Is the one, the incumbent of which is a 'Scientist or
Engineer' defined as below in a scientific
institution/organization declared as 'Scientific
Department' as defined above and is engaged in
creating new scientific knowledge or innovative
engineering, technological or medical techniques or
which is involved predominantly in professional
research work and development.
Scientists and Engineers
a. Who possess academic qualification of at least
Mater's degree in natural/Agricultural Sciences of
Bachelor's degree in Engineering/Technology/
Medicine; and
b. Hold scientific posts as defined above."
5. The Central Silk Board, the first petitioner
herein adopted and implemented the FCS under OM dated
30.08.2006. As on the said date, there was no separate
Recruitment Rules for scientists and administrative staff.
Based on the OMs existing then, the respective
respondents in both the petitions as stated above, were
extended the FCS and were promoted to the post of
Scientist-C and Scientist-D.
- 10 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
6. The Ministry of Textiles, under communication
dated 17.04.2012 (Annexure-R12), issued clarification
stating that CSB Scientists with Statistics, Social Science
and MBA background will not fall within the ambit of
Science and Technology. Accordingly, based on the
clarification, the respondents were issued with intimation
that CSB officials with Social Science background will not
fall within the ambit of Science and Technology and that
the respondent is not eligible for grant of in-situ promotion
under FCS. Much thereafter, the petitioner approached the
CAT in the above stated way with a prayer to direct the
respondents i.e. petitioners herein to consider extending
the benefits under the FCS or equivalent scheme with all
consequential benefits as has been extended to other
similarly situated persons in other Government
organizations and release a fresh combined seniority list of
all the scientists working in Central Silk Board. The CAT
under impugned orders allowed the OAs and directed the
petitioners herein to treat the respondents as scientists
and held that they are eligible for FCS and other
- 11 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
consequential benefits. Questioning the orders of the CAT,
petitioners are before this Court in these two writ
petitions.
7. Heard Sri. Madhukar M Deshpande, learned
Central Government Counsel for petitioners and learned
Senior Counsel Sri M Aruna Shyam for Smt. Shilpa S Gogi,
learned advocate for respondent in WP No. 3935/2021 and
Sri. Deshraj, learned counsel for respondent in WP No.
4963/2021. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
8. Learned counsel Sri. Madhukar M Deshpande
appearing for petitioners in both the petitions would
submit that the CAT proceeded to define the word
"scientist" instead of deciding whether the respondents
would fall within the FCS and entitled to the benefits.
Further, he submits that the respondents cannot claim
themselves as scientists as they would not possess the
qualification of Master's Degree in Natural/Agricultural
Sciences or Bachelor's Degree in Engineering/Technology
/Medicine. It is submitted that the respondents in both the
- 12 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
writ petitions cannot be treated as scientists. They would
not possess the minimum qualification prescribed under
O.M. dated 10.09.2010. Further, learned counsel would
submit that the respondents possess the qualification of
MSW and MBA respectively, which would not be the
qualification prescribed for scientists. It is pointed out
that FCS benefit would be available only to the scientists
and the words "scientist" and "scientific institution" is
defined under various OMs. Referring to the impugned
order passed by the CAT, learned counsel for the
petitioners would submit that the CAT substituted its own
definition of scientist and scientific institution contrary to
the relevant OMs with regard to FCS. It is submitted that
the CAT failed to appreciate whether the respondents with
their qualification of MSW and MBA could be categorized
as scientists and whether they could be extended benefit
of FCS. Thus, he would pray for allowing the writ
petitions.
9. Learned Senior Counsel Sri. M Aruna Shyam
and Sri. Deshraj, learned counsel appearing for the
- 13 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
respective respondents vehemently contended that the
writ petitions are liable to be dismissed solely on the
ground of delay and laches, since the writ petitions were
filed challenging the impugned order passed by the CAT on
27.08.2019 and 05.12.2019, after more than six months
without explaining the cause for delay in filing the writ
petitions. Further, learned Senior Counsel would point out
that the qualification of MSW would qualify to be treated
as 'science' since qualification of MSW would include Social
Science. He would further submit that the respondents
were extended benefit in the year 2006, on verifying their
qualification and treating them as scientists. As the benefit
of FCS is extended on verification and examination of
respondents' qualification and nature of work carried out
by them, subsequently it could not have been withdrawn.
Further, it is submitted that the nature of work of the
respondents are identical to the work carried on by
scientists as they would work in the field of Social Science
and Agricultural Science respectively. Therefore, he
submits that the respondents were rightly extended the
- 14 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
benefit of FCS. Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the
writ petitions.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, the
points that would arise for consideration are as follows:
"i) Whether the respondents could be
treated as scientists for the purpose of
extending FCS in terms of the relevant OMs?
ii) Whether the impugned order of the
CAT requires interference?"
11. The answer to the above points would be
negative and affirmative for the following reasons:
The respondents are initially appointed as Senior
Research Assistant, Social Science, with qualification of
B.A. with Master's Degree in Social Works and Ph.D in
Sociology and as Assistant Director (Sericulture/
Agriculture Management) with qualification of
B.Sc.(Agriculture), Master of Business Management and
Ph.D in Economics, respectively. Both of them were
extended in-situ promotion to the post of Scientist-C and
- 15 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
Scientist-D respectively by extending the benefit of FCS.
The OM dated 09.11.1998 of the Ministry of Personnel
Public Grievance and Pensions, Department of Personnel
and Training (Annexure-A2) modifying the FCS for
scientists in various scientific departments in pursuance to
recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission
makes it clear that FCS as per its original objective be
made applicable only to scientists and technologists
holding scientific post in scientific and technology
departments and who are engaged in scientific activities
and services. Subsequently, under OM dated 10.09.2010
issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel
Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel
and Training, modifying FCS for scientists based on
recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission
defined scientific post to mean who possess academic
qualifications of at least, Master's Degree in
Natural/Agricultural Sciences or Bachelor's Degree in
Engineering/Technology/medicine and hold scientific post
as defined in the said OM.
- 16 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
12. Admittedly, respondent in W.P.No.3935/2021
would possess the qualification of MSW i.e., Master of
Social Works, which would not fall within the definition of
scientists and engineers as defined under O.M. dated
10.09.2010 (Annexure-R2). Further, respondent in WP No.
4963/2021 possesses the qualification of B.Sc. in
Agriculture, MBA and Ph.D in Economics. This qualification
also would not fall within the definition of scientists and
engineers. Moreover, this respondent does not possess the
Master's Degree in Natural/Agricultural Science. Both the
respondents would not possess the Master's Degree in
natural/Agricultural Science or Bachelor's Degree in
Engineering/Technology/Medicine.
13. The CAT placed reliance on judgments which
were rendered on entirely different facts and orders
passed in respect of scientists working in Indian Council of
Forest Research and Education. It is also brought to the
notice of this Court that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Indian Council of Agriculture Research vs.
- 17 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
Rajinder Singh and others, reported in 2024, reported
in SCC OnLine SC 2137, considered an identical
question. In the said decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
was examining as to whether the technical personnel/staff
could seek extension of the benefit extended to the
scientists in the Indian Council of Agricultural Research.
The Hon'ble Apex Court considering the definition of
'scientific' and 'technical' in the Byelaws of the ICAR at
paragraphs No. 10, 10.1, 10.2, has held as follows:
"10.1 Merely after having Ph.D. qualification, the
technical personnel will not become eligible for
grant of two advance increments when the same
has not been recommended for them. In any
institution incentives may be given to a particular
category of employees to get higher qualifications
during service, considering their job requirements.
Merely because different set of employees, who
may be working in aid but governed by different set
of rules and having different duties to discharge
also obtain that qualification, will not entitle them
to the benefits which were extended to different set
of employees by the competent authority. In the
said sequel of facts, Article 14 of the Constitution of
India will not have any application.
- 18 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
10.2 The Tribunal and High Court have erred by
equating technical personnel and scientists and
granting respondents advance increments to which
they are not entitled to. The argument raised by
the respondents that after obtaining the Ph.D.
qualification, the Technical Staff are entitled to be
considered for lateral entry into the scientists is
also to be noticed and rejected as the additional
qualification merely makes them eligible for the
higher post in the different cadre and not to grant
them benefits, which are attached to the higher
post in a different cadre. Similar is the position
regarding Entry 66 in List I to the 7th Schedule
attached to the Constitution of India. The contents
of the Entries in 7th Schedule only prescribe limits
of the powers of the Parliament or the State
Legislature to enact laws."
14. In the present case, the CAT instead of
examining whether the respondents with their qualification
would fall within the definition of scientist in terms of
relevant OMs, i.e., O.M. dated 09.11.1998 (Annexure-A2)
as well as O.M. dated 10.09.2010 (Annexure-R2),
proceeded to direct the petitioners herein to extend the
benefit of FCS to respondents. The CAT also could not
have defined word "science" to say that it would mean a
- 19 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
deeper study. The CAT could not have rewritten OMs
which extended FCS benefit.
15. The learned Senior Counsel for respondent in
W.P.No.3935/2021 and learned counsel for respondent in
W.P.No.4963/2021 contended that the writ petitions are
liable to be rejected on the ground of delay and laches.
The said contention is untenable. The order impugned in
W.P.No.3935/2021 is dated 27.08.2019 and the petition
was filed on 03.03.2020. Similarly, the order impugned in
W.P.No.4963/2021 is dated 05.12.2019 and the petition
was filed on 27.05.2021. In response, learned counsel for
the petitioners submitted that obtaining certified copy and
in the process of getting approval and drafting has taken
some time to file the petitions during the COVID-19
period. Though no limitation is prescribed to invoke Article
226 of the Constitution of India, such invocation shall be
made within a reasonable time. In the instant case, filing
of these petitions within about 7 months from the date of
impugned order passed by the CAT, that too during
- 20 -
WP No. 3935 of 2021
C/W WP No. 4963 of 2021
COVID-19 period is reasonable. As such, the respondents'
contention stands rejected.
16. For the reasons recorded above, the following:
ORDER
i) Writ petitions are allowed.
ii) The impugned orders dated 27.08.2019 and 05.12.2019 in OA No.170/1387/2-018 and OA No. 170/01282/2018, respectively passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal are hereby set aside.
iii) Consequently, both the Applications stand dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC/BSV CT:bms