Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
B S Chhonker vs M/O Personnel,Public Grievances And ... on 17 March, 2026
Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No.1279/2016
No.
This the 17th day of March, 2026
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
Sh. B.S. Chhonker Section Officer (Retd.) B-
B
657, Gali No.8, Rajveer Colony, Gharoli,
Delhi-110091.
...Applicant
..Applicant.
(By Advocate: Mr. Rajat Gaur)
Gaur
Versus
1. Union of India Through The Secretary
Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT)
Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market New Delhi
2. The Secretary Union Public Service Commission
(UPSC) Shajahan Road, New Delhi.
Delhi
...Respondents.
(By Advocate: Mr. Gyanendra Singh, Mr. Hanu Bhaskar,
Mr. R V Sinha)
---
Page 1 of 15
SURAJ BISHT
2026.04.01
16:18:10
+05'30'
Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J):-
In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Tribunal Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following relief(s):
"(a)
(a) Direct the respondents to fix applicant's pay from 01.07.2007 under FR22(1)(a) (1) read with Rule 13 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 i.e. from the next date of increment in Assistant Grade as ggiven to others.
(b) direct the respondents to grant Non-Functional Non Functional Scale with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-to to the applicant from 01.07.2013 as given to others.
(c) direct the respondents to give retirement benefits and revise applicant's pension accordingly.
(d) award costs of the proceedings and
(e) pass any other order/direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour of the applicant and against the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case."
case.
2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was appointed as Section Officer in UPSC on ad ad-hoc hoc basis and continued on extension till his superannuation on 30.11.2013. He was due for promotion as Section Officer on the basis of the Select List of 2009, and his name appeared at S. No. 39 in the list forwarded by DoPT to UPSC for consideration under the Seniority Quota, with a request to conduct DPC. The applicant also submitted a representation for pay fixa fixation w.e.f.
Page 2 of 15
SURAJ BISHT
2026.04.01
16:18:10
+05'30'
Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
01.07.2007 under FR 22(1)(a)(1), having completed 4 years of service. He further submits that the first DPC was held after the prescribed date i.e. 15.10.2013, wherein the applicant was found fit but his case was deferred due to non-availability of ACR for 2007- 2008; in the second DPC, he was again found fit for promotion. However, UPSC informed DoPT that promotion orders were not issued as the applicant had already retired and was not in service at the time of DPC, and that the delay in holding DPC was due to administrative reasons and operational constraints. He submits that UPSC further stated that had the DPC been conducted in time, the applicant would have been granted Non-Functional Scale (NFS) with higher pay w.e.f. 01.07.2013, and sought clarification from DoPT regarding grant of financial benefits and pension revision for similarly placed retired officers. Despite being included in the Select List vide DoPT order dated 25.09.2013, the applicant was denied NFS in PB-III with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- w.e.f. 01.07.2013 in terms of DoPT O.M. dated 14.11.2014, whereas his juniors were granted promotion and financial benefits from the said date, causing financial loss to the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the representation of the applicant was forwarded to DoPT vide letter dated 12.09.2014, followed by reminders dated 15.12.2014 and 08.01.2015 and D.O. letter dated 22.07.2015, but no response was received. The applicant contends that denial of Page 3 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 promotion and NFS due to administrative delay is illegal and unjust, and claims entitlement to promotion and NFS w.e.f. 01.07.2013 with consequential benefits; hence, the present O.A. has been filed.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn reference to the list 'Zone of officers for inclusion in the Select List of Section Officer for the year 2009', wherein the applicant is placed at Sl. No. 39 (Annexure A/3). He has further drawn our attention to a Notification dated 11.11.2013, which reads as under:
"No.A-32014/04/2010-Admn.IV(LA): In pursuance of Department of Personnel and Training's O.M No.6/2/2013-CS.I(S)-I dated 25th September, 2013, the President is pleased to promote the following regular Assistants [presently working as Section Officer (ad-hoc)] of the CSS Cadre of the Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs and Legislative Department) as Section Officer on regular basis in the CSS Cadre of the same Ministry in PB-2 Rs.9300-34800, Grade Pay - Rs.4800/-w.e.f. the forenoon of 4th November, 2013 by including them in the Select List Year 2009 of Section Officer:-
Sl. Sl. No. in the Name of the Date of CSL Asstt. Present No. Annex.I to DoPT's officer Birth Grade Place of OM dt. 25.09.2013 posting
(i) 69 Shri R. 05.05.1955 1992/175 D/o Legal Rajagopal Affairs (Br.
Sectt.
Bangalore)
(ii) 294 Ms. 09.02.1957 1993/422 Legislative
Chander Department
Kanta
2. The appointment of above officers as Section Officer is subject to the outcome of the following court cases and also as per any other orders by any competent court in any of the connected matters:-
(1) OA No. 4135/2012, MA No. 3477/2012 filed by Shri Rajeev R & Ors Vs. UOI in CAT, New Delhi.
(ii) OA No. 4082/2012 & MA No. 3488/2012 filed by Shri M.R. Meena & Ors. Vs. UOI in CAT, New Delhi.
(iii) OA No. 4141/2012 filed by Shri Shanti Lal Bourasi & Ors. Vs. UOI in CAT, New Delhi.
(iv) WP (C) No.2735/2013 filed by Shri Sauranshu Sinha & Ors. Vs. UOI and Ors. in the High Court of Delhi"Page 4 of 15
SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
3. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the aforesaid Notification dated 11.11.2013 clearly establishes that the applicant was regularized in the cadre of SO with effect from 04.11.2013, while he was very much in service.
4. He further submits that, pursuant to the aforesaid order, Office Order No. 243/2013 dated 30.12.2013 has been issued in respect of Shri Rajagopal, which reads as follows:
"Consequent upon her inclusion in Select List 2009 of Section Officer w.e.f. 04.11.2013, vide Department of Legal Afair's Notification No.A-32014/04/2010-Admn.IV(LA) dated 11.11.2013 in pursuance of DoP&T O.M. No.6/2/2013-CS.I(S)-I dated 25.09.2013, in continuation of her ad-hoc appointment as SO w.e.f. 01.03.2007 and as per option exercised by her under FR 22(1)(a)(1) for pay fixation w.e.f. 01.07.2007, date of next increment with reference to initial appointment as SO, the pay of Smt. Chander Kanta, Section Officer, in this Department is fixed as under :-
Event Pay in PB Grade Pay Total
Pay drawn as Assistant in PB-2 (9300- Rs. Rs.4600/- Rs.19020
34800) + GP Rs. 4600/- as on 01.03.2007 14420/- /-
Pay as on 01.03.2007 in PB-2 (Rs. 9300- Rs. Rs.4800/- Rs.19020
34800) + GP Rs. 4800/- on inclusion in SL- 14420/- /-
2009 of SO
Pay on grant of annual increment @3% i.e. Rs.14990/- Rs.4600/- Rs.19590
Rs. 570/- as on 01.07.2007 in PB-2 /-
(Rs.9300-34800) + GP Rs.4600/-
Add: 3% notional increment in PB-2, GP- Rs.590/-
Rs. 4600/- on inclusion in SL-2009 of SO on date of option i.e. 01.07.2007 Pay fixed on inclusion in SL-2009 of SO as Rs.15580/- Rs.4800/- Rs.20380 on 01.07.2007 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.16200/- Rs.4800/- Rs.21000
620/- as on 01.07.2008 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.16830/- Rs.4800/- Rs.21630
630/- as on 01.07.2009 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.17480/- Rs.4800/- Rs.22280
650/- as on 01.07.2010 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.18150/- Rs.4800/- Rs.22950
670/- as on 01.07.2011 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.18840/- Rs.4800/- Rs.23640
690/- as on 01.07.2012 /-
Pay on grant of increment @3% i.e. Rs. Rs.19550/- Rs.4800/- Rs.24350
7100/- as on 01.07.2013 /-
Add: 3% notional increment in PB-2, GP- Rs.730/-
Rs.4800/- on grant of Non-functional pay scale in PB-3 (Rs.15600-39100) + Grade Pay- Rs.5400/- w.e.f. 01.07.2013 (monetary benefit w.e.f. 04.11.2013.
Page 5 of 15
SURAJ BISHT
2026.04.01
16:18:10
+05'30'
Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
Pay fixed on grant of Non-functional pay Rs.20280/- Rs.5400/- Rs.25680
scale in PB-3, GP- Rs.5400/- w.e.f. /-
01.07.2013 (Monitory benefit w.e.f.
04.11.2013) vide Deptt. Of Legal Affairs Office Order No.232/2013 bearing file No.A.32012/03/2003-Admn.IV(LA) dated 06.12.2013
2. Her date of next increment will be 01.07.2014, if otherwise admissible. She will be entitled to draw arrears of pay & allowances, if any w.e.f. 01.03.2007.
3. The above pay fixation is subject to post audit and overpayment made, if any will be recovered from the officer in lump sum. This issues with the concurrence of IF Section vide their Dy. No.1350/2013-B&A dated 17th December, 2013."
5. He further submits that the aforesaid order clearly shows that the applicant has been granted benefits under the order dated 30.12.2013 with retrospective effect, as noted hereinabove. He accordingly prays for grant of relief on similar lines.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant places reliance on the various case laws, which reads as under:
a). Judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1409/2009 and Batch on 22.04.2010 titled Shri P.G. George vs. Union of India and Anr.
b). Judgment passed by the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 210/000278/2016 on 22.10.2019 titled Smt. Lata Satyanarayan Kamath vs. Union of India and Ors.
c). Judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 3811/2012 pronounced on 08.09.2016 titled J.D. Vashisht and Ors. vs. Union of India and Anr.Page 6 of 15
SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
d). Judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 681/2016 pronounced on 07.05.2018 titled Rajendra Prasad-II vs. Union of India and Anr.
e). Judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 2451/2017 on 17.01.2017 titled Bishan Dass vs. Union of India and Anr.
f). Judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) 12213/2026 dated 19.09.2023 titled Union of India and Anr. vs. Bishan Dass.
g). Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(Civil) Diary No(s). 3118/2024 dated 18.10.2024 titled Union of India and Anr. vs. Bishan Dass.
7. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents relies upon the averments made in the counter affidavit. He submits that the respondents have taken a holistic view in the present matter. He submits that as per DPC guidelines, promotions are effective from a prospective date only. Grant of notional fixation of pay from a date prior to the date of actual promotion is not as per the general instructions on promotion. The pay and allowances attached to a post is admissible only w.e.f. the date of appointment to the post and for actual pay benefit, assumption of charge of the promotional post is the criterion.
Page 7 of 15
SURAJ BISHT
2026.04.01
16:18:10
+05'30'
Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
8. He has further submitted that as per extant instructions issued by Establishment Division of this Department (OM No. 22011/4/98- Estt. (D) dated 12.10.1998), which is the nodal division on matters relating to promotion, pay etc., all eligible officers, who were within the zone of consideration for a relevant year(s) but are not actually in service when the DPC is being held. should also be considered to identify the correct zone of consideration for relevant year(s) Such officers, however, have no right for actual promotion. If granted, it would amount to continued loss to public exchequer and disparity among similarly placed officers. It has been further averred that as per Rule 12(1) of Central Secretariat Service (CSS) Rules 2009, the regular vacancies in the grade of Section Officers shall be filled fifty percent through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) and fifty percent by appointment of persons included in the Select List for the Section Officers' Grade (Seniority Quota).- Provided that if sufficient number of candidates are not available for filling up the vacancies in a cadre unit in any recruitment year, either by LDCE or by promotion on the basis of seniority, the unfilled vacancies shall be carried forward and added to the number of vacancies of the same mode of recruitment to be filled in the next recruitment year. Provided further that no such unfilled vacancies shall be carried forward for more than two recruitment years, beyond the year to which the recruitment relates, where after the vacancies if Page 8 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 any, still remaining unfilled belonging to one mode of recruitment shall be transferred as additional vacancies for the other mode of recruitment."
9. He submits that as per Rule 2(c)(iii) of CSS Rules, 2009, the approved service in respect of an officer recruited to a grade on the basis of length of service in the lower grade (viz. Seniority Quota) is defined as, period or periods of regular service rendered in that grade, including period or periods of absence during which he would have held a post on regular basis in that grade but for his being on leave or otherwise not being available to hold such post, from the first day of July of the year for which the recruitment was made provided that where there is delay of more than ninety days in joining on appointment, such delay should not be due to any fault on the part of the officer. The eligibility condition as per CSS Rules, 2009 and regulations issued there-under for inclusion in the Select List of Section Officer of CSS for a particular year against Seniority Quota is as follows:
i) Eligible officers of the Assistants' Grade (Now Assistant Section Officers' Grade) who have rendered not less than eight years' approved service in that Grade and are in the zone of consideration, in the order of their seniority, subject to the rejection of unfit, on the recommendations of the DPC.Page 9 of 15
SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
ii) The officer should have undergone and successfully completed such mandatory training programs as may be prescribed by the Government.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the Central Secretariat Service consist of 49 cadre units (Ministries/Departments of Government of India) in so far as Section Officer grade of CSS is concerned and the grade was being operated on decentralized basis till Select List year 2005 for all purposes. Post SL year 2005, on the recommendations of the Cadre Restructuring Committee 2003, the vacancies for a Select List Year, is assessed on the basis of Post Based Reservation Roster (PBRR) prepared centrally in this Department. However, the grade is still decentralized for the purpose of DPC and also matters relating to administration, vigilance etc. As regards promotions in the grade against Seniority Quota are concerned, this Department issues zone of consideration for inclusion in a Select List for a particular year as per the vacancies earmarked for that mode of promotion and DPCs are held in respective cadre units, where the officers are posted. Issue of zone of consideration for Section Officer Select Lists for 2009 and later years against Seniority Quota was delayed as the Central Secretariat Service (Preparation of Select Lists for the Section Officers and Assistants' Grades) Regulations, 2013 as per clause (d) of sub-rule 2 Page 10 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 of rule 12 and sub-rule (2) of rule 16 of the CSS Rules, 2009 could be notified only on 12.07.2013 after necessary consultations and approvals.6 The zone of consideration for inclusion in SO SLs for the years 2009 to 2011 was finally issued on 25.09.2013 and the applicant who was working in UPSC at that time was included in the zone for SO SL for the year 2009 against Seniority Quota on the basis of his seniority in the Assistant grade. However, he did not get any benefit of regular promotion, as he superannuated on 30.11.2013 before the date of DPC held in UPSC. His case was initially considered by the DPC held in UPSC on 27.03.2014 but his case was deferred by the DPC as one of his ACRs of reckonable years was not available in the subsequent DPC held on 01.09.2014, he was found fit. The applicant and some similarly placed officers who were included in the zone for SO SLs for the year 2009 to 2011 but retired before DPC could be held in their respective Ministries/Departments, submitted representations for grant of notional fixation of pay w.e.f. 1st July of the Select List Year and also for grant of consequential benefits such as NFS, revised pension etc. No final decision on these representations could be arrived at till date as it involves relaxation of rules for which concurrence of Establishment Division of this Department and Department of Expenditure and approval of various authorities are required and also in view of the DPC guidelines and a policy decision taken in this Department in 2010. Notional fixation of Page 11 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 pay with effect from 1st July of the Select List had been allowed from Select Lists for the years 2001 to 2008 in various grades of CSS. However, consequent to a joint meeting held between officers of Estt. Division and Central Secretariat Division of this Department, a policy decision was taken in 2010 to discontinue retrospective notional fixation of pay practice as DPC is prospective in terms of general principles. Therefore, the benefit of notional fixation of pay has not been granted in any grade of CSS/CSSS/CSCS from Select List 2009 onwards.
11. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the respondents places reliance on the following case laws:
a). Nirmal Chandra Sinha Vs Union of India & Ors, reported as (2008) 14 SCC 29
b). Union of India Vs Rajendra Roy, reported as 2007 (1) ILR (Del) 378
c). Union of India Vs R.N. Malhotra, reported as 2012 (191) DLT 449
d). Union of India & Ors Vs Vijender Singh & Ors, reported as 176 (2011) DLT 247 (DB) Page 12 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016
e). Union of India & Anr Vs K.L. Taneja & Anr, reported as 2013 SCC OnLine Del 1428
12. Learned counsel for the respondents further relies upon the decision rendered by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 2739/2021 pronounced on 17.04.2025 titled Pradip Kumar Gupta and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors., which reads as under:
"6.8. The above narrated factual matrix would reveal that due to ongoing litigation (s), even though the names of six applicants were found to be eligible for promotion but could not be finalised due to status quo order(s). The applicant's own showing the promotion(s) have been accorded to the juniors vide Office Order dated 28.12.2023 but the same have been not accorded retrospectively. The claim of the applicants even for retrospective promotion on notional basis cannot be acceded to as it is well settled law that promotion cannot be retrospective unless and otherwise provided for. Had any of the juniors granted retrospective promotion, the situation would have been otherwise. The promotion(s) were functional in character. Merely having a vacancy by itself is not sufficient to grant promotion. The only right accrued to the applicants were right to be considered for promotion. No doubt there is substance in the submissions urged on the behalf of the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants were amongst the eligible persons in the combined service referred to in clause (a) of New Rules till the first 151 vacancies in terms of Note-1 which were to be filled up after notification of the new Recruitment Rules as per eligibility criteria under Old Rules. However, merely having names in zone of consideration for the promotion does not help their case. In present case also no specific instances were highlighted as to why the applicants was allegedly singled out to be deprived of due consideration, or why the DPC was delayed, allegedly intentionally to deprive him the benefit of promotion.
6.9 A situation may so arise in the event any junior to the applicants seek consequential benefits with retrospective effect prior to their date of retirement or any decision is rendered in PS Satry's (supra), which would have some bearing in the present case, the applicants shall be not be remedy less to seek such relief(s) to which they shall be entitled to."
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings available on record, we are of the considered view that the present matter pertains to the grant of benefits which were accorded to an immediate junior, irrespective of whether such benefits were granted retrospectively or prospectively. The aforesaid Page 13 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 orders/notification clearly reflect that, although the orders in favour of Shri Rajagopal were passed subsequent to the applicant's retirement, their effect was given retrospectively, as already noted hereinabove. It is also well settled that Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) cannot be equated with promotion. There is nothing on record to establish that the applicant, while in service, was not eligible for the grant of NFU benefits and the retrospective effect of regularization of the ad hoc period as Section Officer, along with consequential benefits. In the present facts and circumstances, a distinction can be drawn from the judgment in Pradip Kumar Gupta (supra) relied upon by the respondents, particularly in light of paragraph 6.9 thereof.
14. In view of the above, the present Original Application is allowed. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate re-fixation orders qua the applicant vis-à-vis Shri Rajagopal, in terms of Office Order dated 30.12.2013, for the respective dates in question. Since the present O.A. was filed in the year 2016, the re-fixation shall be carried out accordingly. So far as arrears are concerned, since the applicant seeks NFU, which cannot be equated with promotion, the arrears shall be restricted to a period of three years prior to the filing of the O.A. Accordingly, revised pay fixation and pension orders Page 14 of 15 SURAJ BISHT 2026.04.01 16:18:10 +05'30' Item No.45 (Court-4) O.A. No.1279/2016 shall be issued qua the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
15. The O.A. is allowed in the aforesaid terms. All pending MA(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. No costs.
(Dr. Anand S Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/sb/
Page 15 of 15
SURAJ BISHT
2026.04.01
16:18:10
+05'30'