Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: NFFU in Anil Kumar Yadav vs Union Of India & Anr. on 3 September, 2024Matching Fragments
2. Vide the impugned order, the petitioners‟ representations seeking relaxation in Mandatory Field Service (MFS) was rejected and they were both required to be de-attached from the MHA, so they could complete the required MFS for grant of Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU). Aggrieved by such action of the respondents, the petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer that the impugned order be set aside and their request for grant for NFFU w.e.f. 01.01.2022, by waiving the requirement of MFS in the rank of 2-I/C, be accepted.
Analysis and conclusion
18. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record, the short question which emerges for consideration of this Court is, as to whether, in the facts of the present case, the petitioners were entitled to the relaxation in the required MFS for grant of NFFU.
19. At the outset, it may be noted that in order to overcome the problem of stagnation, where regular promotions cannot be granted due to lack of vacancies or other similar reasons, the 6th Central Pay Commission recommended the grant of NFFU to all Group „A‟ officers in various organizations‟ Group „A‟ services. While such a grant of NFFU is only by way of advance grant of financial benefit, which would otherwise accrue later to the concerned individual when they are considered for regular promotion as per DPC guidelines based on the provisions of Recruitment Rules. Thus, NFFU was envisaged as a financial up-gradation without changing the seniority, post or duties of the employees.
20. In pursuance of the directions of the Apex Court in Union of India vs Haranada [2019 SCC OnLine SC 126], the Union of India (UOI) vide its OM dated 04.07.2019 has directed the grant of the benefit of NFFU to group „A‟ Executive Cadre officers of the CAPF. We, thus, find that NFFU has been made applicable to all the grade „A‟ services without linking them to vacancies in their respective grades. As per the DoPT‟s OM dated 24.04.2009, the MHA has, therefore, clarified that to be eligible for grant of NFFU, the officer has to fulfill all the terms and conditions as laid down in the said OM.
21. A symbiotic reading of MHA‟s OM dated 30.09.2019 and the DOPT‟s OM dated 24.04.2009, encompasses all eligibility criteria, as are applicable for promotion and also required for the grant of NFFU.
22. Alluding to the mandatory requirements set out in these OMs, the counsel for the respondents vehemently submitted that as per the aforesaid OMs, an officer, to be eligible for grant of NFFU has to fulfill all the six prescribed conditions in the Recruitment Rules for promotion. One of those being, „two years mandatory field service in the rank of 2-I/C‟. He submitted that respondents being the employer are fully within their rights to prescribe eligibility criteria and consider other conditions before grant of such upgradations. As the petitioners failed to meet the MFS criteria, they were found to be not eligible for grant of NFFU.