Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
C S Mathur vs M/O Water Resources on 15 January, 2026
1
OA No. 3905/2015 with
OA No. 3940/2015
Item No.50/C-4
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 3905/2015
with
O.A. No. 3940/2015
Reserved on: 02.12.2025
Pronounced on: 15.01.2026
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
O.A. No. 3905/2015
Shri K.R.Joshi
S/0 Late Sh. K. Madhav Joshi
Age about 65 years
Ex. Chief Engineer, Central Water Commission
R/0 G-10, Smaran Vaibhav Aptt.
Aildas Layout, 7th Main, Vijayanagar
Bangalore-560040.
... Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. B.K. Berera)
Versus
1. Union of India
Through Secretary
Ministry of Water Resources, RD&GR
Shram Shakti Bhawan
New Delhi -110001
2. The Secretary
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
Department of Personnel and Training
New Delhi.
3. Chairman
Central Water Commission
Sewa Bhavan, R.K. Puram
New Delhi-110066
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Gyanendra Singh)
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30'
2
OA No. 3905/2015 with
OA No. 3940/2015
Item No.50/C-4
O.A. No. 3940/2015
Shri C.S. Mathur
S/0 Late Sh. Maheshwar Singh
Age about 64 years
Ex. Chief Engineer
Central Water Commission
R/0 D-87, First Floor
Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019.
... Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. B.K. Berera)
Versus
1. Union of India
Through Secretary
Ministry of Water Resources, RD&GR
Shram Shakti Bhawan
New Delhi -110001
2. The Secretary
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
Department of Personnel and Training
New Delhi.
3. Chairman
Central Water Commission
Sewa Bhavan, R.K. Puram
New Delhi-110066.
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Ranjan Tyagi)
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30'
3
OA No. 3905/2015 with
OA No. 3940/2015
Item No.50/C-4
ORDER
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A) Since a common question of facts and law arises in the present O.As., we have heard both the OAs together and they are being disposed of by this common order. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are primarily being extracted from O.A. No. 3905/2015 being the lead case, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The O.A. No. 3905/2015 has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:-
"a) quash and set aside the impugned letter dated 10-03-2015 informing the Applicant that he does not qualify for grant of NFU from SAG to HAG.
b) directions to the respondents to grant the Applicant Non functional upgradation from SAG to HAG w.e.f. 26-12-
2007, the due date, instead of 03-12-2009 with all the consequential benefits;
c) pass such other or further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, proper and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."
3. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted as under:
3.1 The applicant joined as Assistant Director (Junior Time Scale grade), which is categorized as an Organised Group 'A' Service, on 02.01.1976 in the Central Water Commission (CWC), i.e. Respondent Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 4 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 No.3, on the basis of Combined Engineering Service Examination conducted by UPSC. He retired from Service on 28.02.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation as Chief Engineer, Senior Administrative Grade, in the pay scale of Rs.37,400-67000 plus Grade Pay Rs.10,000/-. He was granted NFU from Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) to Higher Administrative Grade (HAG) w.e.f. 03.12.2009 vide CWC order dated 09.09.2011.
3.2 The request of the applicant for grant of Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) w.e.f. 26.12.2007 instead of 03.12.2009 was rejected by Respondent No.3 vide impugned order dated 10.03.2015.
3.3 In O.A. No. 3940/2015, the applicant joined as Assistant Director on 07.11.1975 and retired from service on 31.10.2011. He was also granted NFU from SAG to HAG w.e.f. 03.12.2009 vide order dated 09.09.2011. However, he received no response to his representation dated 09.04.2014, followed by reminder dated 24.02.2015.
3.4 The learned counsel for the applicant referred to DoPT OM No.AB-14017/64/2008-Estt. [RR] dated 24.04.2009 (Annexure A-2) regarding grant of Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) for Officers of Organised Group 'A' Services in PB-3 and PB-4, which reads as under:
"Consequent upon the acceptance of the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the following orders are issued:Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 5 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4
(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 Organized Group 'A' Service that 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-functional basis from the date of posting of the Indian Administrative Service Officers in that particular grade at the Centre.
(ii) Grant of higher scale would be governed by the terms and conditions given in Annex-I.
(iii) Appropriate amendments in the Service Rules may also be carried out.
xxx xxx xxx
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."
3.5 He also referred to the relevant paras of the terms and conditions for grant of Higher Pay Scale on Non Functional Basis as per Annexure-I to the aforesaid OM dated 24.04.2009, which read as under:
"1. The non functional up-gradation granted under these orders will be based on empanelment and posting of particular batch of IAS officer in the Centre. Such up-gradation would not be linked to the vacancies in the grade.
2. The up-gradation granted under these orders will be a purely non- functional up-gradation, personal to the officer and It would not bestow any right to the officer to claim promotion or deputation benefits based on non-functional up-gradation in such a manner.
3. All the prescribed eligibility criteria and promotional norms including 'benchmark' for up-gradation to a particular grade pay would have to be met at the time of screening for grant of higher pay-scale under these orders.
xxx xxx xxx
6. Orders will be issued with the approval of the competent authority. Grant of higher pay scale on the non-functional basis would be from the date of posting of the first officer belonging to the particular batch of IAS officer at the centre. In case of any Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 6 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 delay in the issue of orders, financial benefits under these orders will be given from the due date."
3.6 He further referred to the DoPT OM dated 25.09.2009 issuing certain clarifications (Annexure A-3). Clarification No.5 of the same provides as under:
Point of Doubt Clarification
5. Whether retired Para 6 of our instructions employees are to be provide that benefits would be granted the benefit of from due date. Therefore, even non-functional retired officers who are upgradation. otherwise eligible as on due date would need to be considered.
3.7 He also drew attention to OM dated 21.05.2009, whereby the DoPT issued details of batch of the officers belonging to the IAS who have been posted at the Centre in the various grades of PB-3 and PB- 4 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as well as the date of posting of the first officer belonging to the batch. In supersession of the list issued in the OM dated 21.05.2009, the revised list was issued vide OM dated 01.07.2010 (Annexure A-5).
3.8 The applicant was granted NFU from SAG to HAG w.e.f. 03.12.2009 vide Ministry of Water Resources order No. dated 09.09.2011 (Annexure A-4). However, as the applicant belongs to 1975 batch of Organised Group 'A' Service, he is eligible for grant of NFU w.e.f. 26.12.2007 as per the said OM dated 21.05.2009. Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 7 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 3.9 Further, the DoPT vide OM dated 15.12.2009 (Annexure A-6) listed steps to amend the existing Service Rules as a follow up of recommendations of 6th CPC for bringing uniformity in eligibility criteria across various organised Group 'A' Services for promotion. Para 2 of the said OM provides that:
"The 6th CPC have also recommended for bringing uniformity in eligibility criteria across various organized Group Services for promotions. The issue has been examined and in the light of these, it has been decided that the following steps to amend the existing Service Rules shall be undertaken on priority basis:
(i) ..... ....
(ii) For promotion to HAG level, the eligibility requirement shall be "Officers in the SAG with 3 years' regular service in the grade OR Officers with 25 years' regular service in Group 'A' posts in the service out of which at least 1 year regular service should be in the SAG"
3.10 The learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant joined Central Water Engineering Service (CWES) on 02.01.76, was granted SAG grade w.e.f. 12.03.2005 and completed more than 30 years' regular service in Group 'A' posts on 12.03.2006, out of which 1 year regular service completed in SAG. In fact, the applicant fulfilled the eligibility criteria meant for regular promotion to HAG in terms of OM dated 15.12.2009. Thus, as per OM dated 24.04.2009 governing the NFU, the applicant is entitled for NFU w.e.f. 26.12.2007, i.e. the date when IAS of 1977 batch is posted at the centre, as per list giving details of batch of the officers belonging to IAS vide DoPT OM dated 21.05.2009. However, vide order dated Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 8 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 09.09.2011, the applicant has been granted upgradation from SAG to HAG w.e.f 03.12.2009, the date when IAS officers of 1979 batch is posted at the centre vide DoPT OM dated 01.07.2010. 3.11 He further contended that the DoPT vide OM dated 10.06.2010 (Annexure A-8) clarified that the 6th CPC had observed that the disparity, as far as appointment to various grades in the Centre are concerned, should not exceed 2 years between IAS and Organised Group 'A' Services. However, the respondents without application of mind and ignoring the instructions of the DoPT, disposed of the applicant's representation stating that since he retired from government service on 28.02.2010, he does not qualify for grant of NFU from SAG to HAG. Hence, this O.A.
4. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit, submitted that at the time of grant of NFU to the applicant, the RRs prevailing were having the provisions for promotion from SAG to HAG with three years' service in the grade of SAG. Therefore, his eligibility was considered according to the provisions of the RRs 2004 and he was granted NFU w.e.f. 03.12.2009. 4.1 He further submitted that the DoP&T vide OM dated 18.01.2011 (Annexure-R3) issued the eligibility criteria for promotion from SAG to HAG which was to be incorporated in the RRs. Accordingly, the Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 9 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 RRs were amended incorporating eligibility criteria as provided in the aforementioned OM. The amended CWES Recruitment Rules, 2013 were notified on 02.11.2013. Since promotion criteria were issued vide DoPT O.M dated 18.01.2011, therefore, the case of promotion for the year 2011-12 and onwards are to be covered under the amended RRs. The DoPT has also clarified that its O.M dated 18.01.2011 will be effective from the year 2011-12 by giving relaxation for the year 2011-
12. Therefore, cases of promotion before the year 2010-11 are required to be covered under the CWES Recruitment Rules, 2004. Therefore, the case of the applicant for grant of NFU in HAG of CWES has rightly been· considered under the provisions of RRs 2004.
4.2 The DoPT vide their Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) issued vide No.AB-14017/47/2011 Estt.(RR) dated 01.08.2012 (Annexure R-
2) clarified at point no. 15 that if an officer does not meet the eligibility requirement as on the 1st January of the corresponding vacancy year then such officer is to be considered for grant of NFU in subsequent vacancy year on completion of qualifying service w.e.f. 1st April, i.e. 1st day of the next vacancy year. In view of the above, the entitlement of the applicant is as follows:-
Name Date of Date off Year Batch in Date of Date of of the Birth Retirement of terms of Joining Regular officers UPSC DoPT's CWES Appoint-
in Exam No.AB- (JTS) ment to
Service 14017/16/ SAG
Gr.'A') 2010
Grad Estt.(RR)
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30'
10
OA No. 3905/2015 with
OA No. 3940/2015
Item No.50/C-4
dated
10.06.2010
K.R. 13.02.1950 28.02.2010 1974 1975 02.01.1976 12.03.2005
Joshi
Date of Date of
Batch of IAS Remarks Date from Actual date
eligibility regular
Officer at (whether which NFU of grant of
for appoint-
SAG level eligible or granted NFU in
promotion ment to
posted to not) for terms of
to HAG in HAG Centre, with 2008-09 DoP&T's
terms of whom pay clarification
CWES parity has to dated
Rules, be made 01.08.2012
2004 (effective
date)
01.01.2009 Not 1977 Yes 03.12.09 01.04.09
Promoted (26.12.07)
4.3 In view of the above clarifications given by DoP&T, the cases of
such officers remained under examination in Central Water Commission and a proposal for review of the effective date of the grant of NFU in respect of such officers, including the case of the applicant, has been undertaken and now under consideration in the office of Respondent No. 1. In view of the above clarifications, the impugned order dated 10.03.2015 issued by Central Water Commission stood infructuous.
4.4 The learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the Order dated 29.11.2016 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in an identical matter bearing O.A. No. 371/2016 (R.P. Saxena vs Union of India & Ors.).
5. In rejoinder to the arguments put forth by the learned counsel for the respondents, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 11 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 that the RRs prevailing at the time of grant of NFU were having provision of 3 years service in the grade of SAG for regular promotion from SAG to HAG and not for grant of NFU.
5.1 He referred to para 3.3.12 of the 6th CPC report, which reads thus:
"3.3.12 ......This is not justified as organised Group A services have to be given their due which justifiably should mean that the disparity, as far as appointment to various grades in Centre are concerned, should not exceed two years between IAS and organised Central Group A services. The Government should, accordingly, consider batch-wise parity while empanelling and/or posting at Centre between respective batches of IAS and other organised Group A services with the gap being restricted to two years. Whenever any IAS officer of a particular batch is posted in the Centre to a particular grade carrying a specific grade pay in pay bands PB-3 or PB-4, grant of higher pay scale on non- functional basis to the officers belonging to batches of organised Group A services that are senior by two years or more should be given by the Government. The higher non-functional grade so given to the officers of organised Group A services will be personal to them and will not depend on the number of vacancies in that grade. These officers will continue in their existing posts and will get substantial posting in the higher grade that they are holding on non-functional basis only after vacancies arise in that grade. This will not only ensure some sort of modified parity between IAS and other Central Group A services but will also alleviate the present level of disparity existing between promotional avenues available to different organised Group A services. It is also observed that eligibility criteria prescribed for promotion to SAG in different technical and non-technical organised Group A services are different. In order to bring uniformity, these eligibility criteria should be uniform across various organised Group A services. The Commission recommends accordingly."
5.2 He further submitted that the Government had given a careful consideration to the recommendations of the 6th CPC in respect of the civilian employees of the Central Government in Group 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D'.... etc. and accepted as a package subject to certain modifications Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 12 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 mentioned in the Resolution dated 29.08.2008 of Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, notified in Part-I, Section-I of Gazette of India : Extraordinary. Part-A, para 1(III) of the Resolution reads as under:
"(III) Pay scales of Central Services Group 'A' Sl. Recommendations of the Decision of the No. Sixth Pay Commission Government
(i) .... ....
Whenever any IAS officer of a Accepted. This will particular batch is posted in the also be applicable to Centre to a particular grade the Indian Police carrying a specific grade pay in Service and the pay bands PB-3 or PB-4, grant of Indian Forest Service higher pay scale on non- in their respective functional basis to the officers State cadres for belonging to batches of organised which the relevant Group A services that are senior cadre controlling by two years or more should be authorities will issue given by the Government. the orders.
"
5.3 He also submitted that aforesaid decision of the Government, vide its Resolution dated 29.08.2008 notified in the Gazette is binding. The same cannot be diluted, toned down or interpreted by the authorities of the Government in the matter prejudicial and detrimental to the interest of the beneficiaries of such decision of the Government. The aforesaid decision was merely to maintain a healthy and reasonable parity between the pay-scales of a particular batch of the IAS with other Organised Group 'A' services of the Government of India. A plain reading and interpretation of the aforesaid Resolution dated 29.08.2008 clearly reveals that the same has nothing to do with the vacancy in the promotional grade of the cadre or the years of Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 13 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 residency in a particular grade except the fact that for having a pay- scale at par with an IAS officer of a particular batch posted in the Centre to a particular grade carrying specific Grade Pay in Pay-Bands PB-3 and PB-4, an officer of the Organised Group 'A' service should be senior by two years or more. Needless to submit that promotion in the cadre is based on vacancy and eligibility in the feeder grade and governed by the relevant rules of the service concerned. The Resolution dated 29.08.2008 has been issued neither in supersession nor in contradiction with such Recruitment Rules. Similarly, by office instructions, the respondents are not entitled to dilute, supersede or tone down the aforesaid decision of the Government, referred to in the Resolution dated 29.08.2008 (Annexure A-9 to the rejoinder). 5.4 In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following case laws:
(i) Order dated 23.10.2013 of this Tribunal in O.A. No 761/2012 titled Dr. Badri Singh Bhandari vs Union of India. However, in that case, the applicants were allowed the benefit of NFU w.e.f.
01.01.2006 instead of 03.01.2006.
(ii) Hon'ble High Court of Delhi's Judgment dated 12.03.2019 in WP (C) No. 8193/2015 titled as Union of India & Ors. vs Dr. Badri Singh Bhandari & Ors.; by which the Hon'ble High Court did not Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 14 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 incline to entertain the petition on account of implementation of the order passed by the Tribunal.
(iii) Judgment dated 02.12.2019 in WP(C) No.3945/2017 titled as Shailendra Singh & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors., highlighting paras 16 & 17 of the judgment, which read as under:
"16. This is somewhat similar to recommendations of a CPC. Periodically restructuring is undertaken; pay-scales are introduced and revised as a result of the recommendations of the CPC. However, the actual implementation of these recommendations gets postponed because in the individual Departments and Ministries, the necessary changes to the RRs have to be made and notifications have to be issued. All of this postpones the actual grant of the benefit in that particular Ministry or Department. However, when it is finally given, the benefit is usually given from the uniform date when such revised pay-scales were made available, as a result of the recommendations of the CPC.
17. That same principle should apply in the present case as well. In other words, notwithstanding that for the EC, the amended RRs may have been notified only with effect from 31st October, 2007, it would not postpone the actual date from which the benefits ought to be given i.e. 1st April, 2004."
(iv) Judgment dated 14.12.2020 in WP (C) No. 13599/2019 titled as Arun Chibber & Anr. vs Union of India & Ors.; wherein it has been observed as under:
"7. However, it is not the argument of the respondents that the petitioners did not meet any of the eligibility criteria laid down in the Recruitment Rules amended in October, 2008 or that the eligibility criteria for deputationists to be appointed as Additional Director General in CRPF were not met by the petitioners. Once it is so and the petitioners are found to meet the eligibility criteria of three years regular service in the SAG or 25 years regular service in group 'A' post and of which at least one year regular service should be in SAG, as found in OM dated 15th December, 2009 for promotion to HAG level, and both of which criteria, it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioners did not satisfy, we are of the view that the petitioners Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 15 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 are entitled to the benefit of NFFU w.e.f. 31st March, 2006 in accordance with OM dated 21st May, 2009 inter-alia providing that since the 1975 batch of IAS officers had been posted/empaneled as Additional Secretary w.e.f. 31st March, 2006 and thus batch of 1973 and earlier of organized Group 'A' service are to be considered for NFFU; it is contended that thus the petitioners who are of 1971 batch, would be entitled to the NFFU benefit from 31st March, 2006 in the HAG grade."
(v) Judgment dated 12.06.2025 in WP (C) Nos. 807/2021 with 827/2021 titled as Dr. Subodh Jha & Ors. vs Union of India & Anr., whereby the benefits of Non-functional Financial Up-gradation (NFFU) were granted to the Medical Officers of BSF Health Service, CRPF Health Service, and ITBP Health Service, as part of OGAS w.e.f. 01.01.2006 as per their eligibility vis-à-vis Medical Officers of Central Health Services (CHS).
(vi) Full Bench decision dated 09.05.2011 of this Tribunal in Mrs. Garima Singh vs Union of India in O.A. No. 3278/2010, wherein it has been held that notification might have been issued in 2009, the increased strength of the cadre shall be treated to have been increased when the order came to the passed by the Government.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the pleadings/judgments available on record as well as written synopsis filed on behalf of the applicants.
6. The core issue for determination is whether the applicants in these OAs. are entitled to grant of NFU from SAG to HAG w.e.f. Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 16 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 26.12.2007, i.e. the date when IAS of 1977 batch is posted at the centre, instead of 03.12.2009.
7. Consequent upon acceptance of the recommendations of the 6th CPC, NFU for Officers of Organised Group 'A' Services in PB-3 and PB-4 was allowed vide OM dated 24.04.2009, the relevant portion of the said OM is extracted below:
"(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 Organized Group 'A' Service that 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-functional basis from the date of posting of the Indian Administrative Service Officers in that particular grade at the Centre.
(ii) Grant of higher scale would be governed by the terms and conditions given in Annex-I.
(iii) Appropriate amendments in the Service Rules may also be carried out."
8. Further, grant of higher pay scale on non-functional basis is governed by several terms and conditions mentioned in Annex-I to the OM. The relevant guidelines are extracted below:
"1. The non functional up-gradation granted under these orders will be based on empanelment and posting of particular batch of IAS officer in the Centre. Such up-gradation would not be linked to the vacancies in the grade.
3. All the prescribed eligibility criteria and promotional norms including 'benchmark' for up-gradation to a particular grade pay would have to be met at the time of screening for grant of higher pay-scale under these orders.
4. A screening committee would be formed by the Ministry for implementation of these orders. There would be three members in committee so formed and they would at-least be one level above the grade for which up-gradation is being considered. Secretary of the Ministry concerned would chair the committee."Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 17 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4
9. It is amply clear from the guidelines that grant of NFU on the basis of clause (i) of the O.M. dated 24.04.2009 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 organised group services are senior by two years or more. Though financial upgradation is not dependent upon the availability of vacancies, the same is to be provided subject to fulfilment of all the prescribed eligibility criteria and promotional norms in hierarchy including 'benchmark' as applicable on the relevant date at the time of screening, but have not been granted promotion to these grades. It is also worthwhile to mention that these rules are applicable to all Organised Group 'A' Services (OGAS) across cadres and grades.
10. From a perusal of the record, it reveals that at the time of grant of NFU to the applicants, the RRs 2004 were prevailing which provided that for promotion from SAG to HAG, three years' service in the grade of SAG was essential. Therefore, the eligibility of all the candidates was considered according to the provisions of the RRs 2004 for grant of NFU in HAG. In the case of the applicants, since they had joined in SAG on 12.03.2005 and 16.03.2005, their date of eligibility for promotion to HAG was 01.01.2009.
11. Though vide OM dated 18.01.2011, the DoPT withdrew the earlier provision of three years' regular service in the SAG (PB-4 Grade Pay Rs.10000), and provided as follows: Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 18 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 "Officers in the SAG (PB-4 Grade Pay Rs.10000) with 3 years' regular service in the grade OR Officers with 25 years regular service in Group 'A' posts in the service out of which at least 1 year regular service should be in the SAG."
To incorporate the above provision, the RRs were amended by the CWC incorporating eligibility criteria as provided in the aforementioned OM; and the amended CWES RRs 2013 were notified on 02.11.2013. Furthermore, in the ibid OM, it has also been clarified that the O.M dated 18.01.2011 will be made effective from the year 2011-12 by giving relaxation for the year 2011-12. Therefore, cases of promotion before the year 2010-11 were required to be covered under the CWES Recruitment Rules, 2004.
12. Further, the DoPT vide FAQs issued vide OM dated 01.08.2012 clarified that if an officer does not meet the eligibility requirement as on the 1st January of the corresponding vacancy year, then such officer is to be considered for grant of NFU in subsequent vacancy year on completion of qualifying service w.e.f. 1st April, i.e. 1st day of the next vacancy year.
13. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have themselves conceded that in view of clarification/FAQs dated 01.08.2012 issued by the DoPT, all such matters were re-examined/reviewed including the applicants. In terms of the above clarification, their actual date of grant of NFU is 01.04.2009, therefore, the applicants were granted Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30' 19 OA No. 3905/2015 with OA No. 3940/2015 Item No.50/C-4 NFU w.e.f. 03.12.2009, and accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.03.2015 had became infructuous.
14. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, we find no merit in the contentions advanced on behalf of the applicants. The respondents have rightly considered the cases of the applicants for grant of NFU from SAG to HAG in accordance with the RRs 2004, which were in force at the relevant time. The grant of NFU w.e.f. 03.12.2009 is in consonance with the applicable rules, DoPT instructions, and the uniform practice followed in respect of similarly placed officers. The applicants have failed to establish any illegality, arbitrariness, or violation of the applicable policy warranting interference by this Tribunal. The judicial precedents relied upon by the applicants are clearly distinguishable on facts and do not advance their case.
15. Accordingly, both the OAs are dismissed being bereft of merits. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(Dr. Anand S. Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/jyoti/
Digitally signed by JYOTI JAIN
Date: 2026.01.15 16:48:32+05'30'