Hardik Gadhavi & Ors. vs The Union Of India & Ors.

The applicants herein are working as Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices (ASPO) (Group-B). Initially, they were appointed as Postal Assistant and during the VIth CPC, they were promoted as Inspector in the pay scale of Rs.9300- 34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- and thereafter, they were further promoted to the post of Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices in level-8 with Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-. Thereafter, on recommendation of the VIIth CPC, the pay scale of ASPO was upgradation and fixed at GP Rs.4800 with effect from 01.01.2016. (Annexure A/3).

The applicant submits that as per the VIth Pay Commission, it is stated "Group B Officers of Departments of Posts, Revenue, etc. will be granted Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- in PB-2 on Non-functional basis after 4 years of regular service in the Grade Pay of Rs.4,800/- in PB-2." (Annexure A/4).

In the meantime, various departments sought clarification from the Department of Expenditure regarding the period of four years is to be calculated and in response to it, it was clarified that the four years period is to be counted w.e.f the date on which the officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 (pre-revised). It was further clarified that if an officer has completed four years on 01.01.2006 or earlier, he will be given Non-functional upgradation with effect from 01.01.2006 and if the officer completes four years on the date after 01.01.2006, he will be given Non-functional upgradation from such date on which he completes four years in the pay scale of Rs 7500-12000 (pre-revised)".

Thus, from the aforesaid clarification, it is clear that these enhancements of Grade Pay does not dependent on the post, but on completion of four years regular service in grade pay of Rs.4800/- in PB-2 (Annexure A/5). The applicants state that the Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices (ASPO's) Grade Pay was upgraded in VIIth CPC recommendation from Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Rs.4800/- from 01.01.2016 and the applicants were promoted and placed in pay matrix level-8 upon on different dates and they have completed four years in the said level 8 i.e. pre-revised Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- and thus, they have become eligible for Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- in pay matrix level-9.

It is submitted that while framing CCS (Revised) Pay Rules of 2016, the relevant rules in CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 are applicable to the applicants were not repealed to the extent they were not in conflict with Rules, 2016. Moreover, Ministry of Finance has clarified vide letter dated 10.04.2017 in consultation with DOE continue to allow Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- after completion of four years for Superintendent Central Excise/ Customs/appraisers of CBEF which was introduced in 6th CPC. The said benefit stands implemented in the various departments such as Central Excise & Customs etc. (Annexure A/7).

Further, it is submitted that the 7th CPC recommended the Non-functional financial up-gradation from Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- to GP of Rs.5400/- at paras 11.12.139/ 11.12.140 for Accounts Officers/ Postal & Railway Officers etc. and the accepted recommendations are as follows:

Learned counsel submits that the issue raised in the present OA has been settled by several judgments, and in particular, the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras dated 06.09.2010 passed in W.P No.13225/2010 in the case of M. Subramaniam Vs UOI. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced as under :

Further, the said judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of Civil Appeal No.8883/2011. The Supreme Court vide order dated 10.10.2017 dismissed the said Civil Appeal. Even the Review Petition bearing No.(C) 2512/2018 in the said Civil Appeal, was also dismissed vide Order dated 23.08.2018, which is reproduced as under :-

Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Civil) No. 23513 & 3189 of 2015, dated 10.10.2017. Therefore, the findings of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras have attained finality (Annexure A/9). A similar case was filed before the CAT Madras Bench and CAT Madras Bench on relying on the above decision of M. Subramaniam Vs UOI, vide order dated 30.3.2012, allowed the said OA 1051/2010. The said decision was challenged before the Hon'ble Madras High Court, the decision of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P No. 39218/2012 in U.O.I v P.Vigneswar Raju vide decision dated 16.4.2018 (Annexure A/10).

The aforesaid issue was also adjudicated by CAT Hyderabad Bench in OA No. 296/2014 and relief was granted on 14.09.2015 by referring to the judgment of the Chennai Bench rendered in OA No.1051/2010 dated 30.03.2012, which was upheld by Hon’ble High Court of Madras High Court in WP No. 3921872012.

The respondents challenged the findings of the Tribunal in OA No.296/2014 in Hon’ble High Court at Hyderabad vide WP No. 31576/2016. The Hon’ble High Court at Hyderabad dismissal the said Writ Petition on 06.11.2018. (Annexure A/11 Colly.).

The CAT Hyderabad Bench once again in a similar issue in OA No.506/2021 dated 02.12.2021 directed the respondents to grant Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- to the applicants therein from the date they are eligible with consequential benefits thereof making it clear that the judgment is rendered ‘in rem‟ so that other similarly placed employees are not compelled to knock the doors of the Tribunal. The said decision was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana in W.P.No.43155/2022, where the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 03.01.2023 has set aside the findings of the Tribunal only in respect of the observations that the judgment is rendered ‘in rem‟ so that other similarly placed employees are not compelled to knock the doors of the Tribunal, whereas confirming the rest of the order passed by the Tribunal. (Annexure A/12).

The aforesaid order passed by the CAT Hyderabad Bench in OA No.506/2021 and judgment passed by the Hon'ble Telangana High Court in W.P.No.43155/2022 has been duly implemented vide order dated 13.07.2023 by the respondents. (Annexure A/13).

Further, it is submitted that the Applicants herein are working in Grade Pay of Rs.4800 /- since last 5 years and more. Therefore, they are eligible for GP of Rs.5400/. It is submitted that others ASPs who were similarly placed in the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- were already granted the benefit prior to implementation of 7th CPC. Therefore, applicants have been discriminated.

That relying on the above orders, judgments passed by various Benches and Courts, all the applicants had made representation addressing to the respondent No.4, but some of their representation were not decided and therefore, some of the applicant approached the Tribunal by filing OA Nos.04, 80 of 2024 and 410/2023 wherein the Tribunal had directed the respondents to decide the pending representations of the applicant in light of the judgment of M.Subramaniam vs Union of India and CAT-Hyderabad order in OA No.506/2021 in case of All India Association of Inspectors and Assistant ,Superintendent. (Annexure A/14).

In response to the said direction of the Tribunal, the respondents vide order dated 16.4.2024 rejected their representations whereas some of representation of the applicants are not yet decided till date. Meanwhile, respondent No.5 issued Memo dated 08.08.2023 to grant the benefits of Grade Pay, but the applicants were denied for such benefits. Hence, the OA.

The applicants relied upon the Order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the CAT Jaipur Bench in OA No.146/2025 wherein it was held that an Assistant Superintendent of Posts who has completed four years of regular service in Level-8 (GP 4800) is legally entitled to Non-Functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2/Level-9 as per the Government of India Resolution and CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Thus, the Tribunal quashed and rejected the impugned order therein and directed the Department of Posts to grant the upgraded Grade Pay with all consequential benefits from the due date, holding that denial of NFU is arbitrary when the applicant is similarly placed and the rules mandate automatic upgradation after four years in GP 4800. That the said order has been implemented in the favour of those applicants by the respondents vide letter dated 11.06.2025. (Annexure A/17)

Further, it is submitted that the Department of Posts has recently issued further instructions vide letter No. 4-1/2020-PCC dated 26.11.2025, purportedly based on the Department of Expenditure I.D. Note dated 11.11.2025, directing all Circles to reject pending representations and contest court cases filed by Assistant Superintendents of Posts / PS Group-B officers seeking Non-Functional Upgradation to Grade Pay 35,400 / Pay Level-9, on the ground that the relief granted by the Hon’ble CAT Hyderabad Bench in OA Nos. 194/2020 & 195/2020 and other connected matters is to be treated as „in personam‟ and not „in rem‟. (Annexure A18).

Learned counsel submits that similar orders passed by the different Benches of this Tribunal have been implemented and the same has not been refused by the respondents. The list of the orders reads as under :

Order dated 06.09.2010 of Hon'ble Madras High Court in WP No. 13225/2010.

Order dated 10.10.2017 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. [C] 23513/2015 & 3189/2015 &17576/2017

Order dated 23.08.2018 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Review Petition (Civil) No. 2512/2018.

Order dated 10.01.2020 of Hon'ble CAT Bangalore in OA No. 850, 859 and 893 of 2014 & OA No.310/1047/2023.

Order dated 14.09.2015 of Hon'ble CAT Hyderabad in OA No. 296/2014.

Order dated 06.11.2018 of Hon'ble Hyderabad High Court in WP No. 31576/2016.

Order dated 08.11.2016 of Hon'ble CAT Chennai in OA No. 106/2016.

The case of the applicants is squarely covered by the decisions referred to hereinabove, wherein the Hon’ble Courts and various Benches of the Tribunal have categorically held that Group-B officers completing four years of regular service in Grade Pay Rs.4,800/- (Level-8) are entitled to the Non-Functional Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- (Level-9). The applicants, being identically situated employees, are therefore legally eligible for Non-Functional Grade on completion of four years in GP Rs.4800/- and denial of the same, amounts to arbitrary and discriminatory inaction. Hence, being aggrieved by the impugned refusal and inaction of the respondents, the applicants have filed the present OA.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned rejection orders issued by Respondent No.4, as well as the Department of Expenditure (DoE) memo/ID Note dated 26.03.2024 and letter dated 16.04.2024, are wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India on account of Clause 1(x)(e) of Government of India Resolution dated 29.08.2008, all Group-B officers of the Department of Posts are mandatorily entitled to the Non-Functional Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- in PB-2/Level-9 after completion of four years of regular service in GP 4,800. The Resolution, which has statutory force, clearly declares that the benefit is tenure-based and not post-based.

Further, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that while rejecting the applicant’s claim, have taken an erroneous stand that the applicants are not entitled to the higher Grade Pay /financial upgradation merely because they are discharging the duties and responsibilities of a higher post, contending that performance of higher duties does not confer a right to higher pay under FR-49 and related DoPT instructions. It is submitted that such a ground is wholly misconceived and contrary to the scheme of Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU), under which the benefit of Grade Pay Rs. 5400 on completion of four years of regular service in Grade Pay Rs.4800 is admissible irrespective of whether higher post duties were formally assigned or not.

Further, such impugned rejection proceeds on an incorrect understanding of law, ignores binding precedents including CAT Jaipur Bench in OA No. 146/2025 and OA No. 212/2024, and illegally deprives the applicants of the statutory financial progression due under the Government of India Resolution and CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.

Since the Ministry of Finance had clarified that the four-year period is to be counted from the date an officer is placed in the pre-revised scale of Rs.7500-12,000 (corresponding to GP Rs.4,800), and therefore the applicants having completed four years in GP Rs.4,800 are entitled to GP Rs.5,400.

The 7th CPC did not withdraw, negate or modify the 6th CPC Non Functional Grade, rather, paras 11.12.139 & 11.12.140 re-affirms that all officers in GP 4,800 who completed four years are to be upgraded to GP Rs.5,400 (PB-2). Hence, learned counsel for the applicants prays that all the applicants are similarly placed employees therefore, they are entitled to get the benefits of upgraded Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-

Inder Pal Yadav & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors, reported in (1985) 2 SCC 648;

K.C. Sharma & Ors. v. Union of India, reported in (1997) 6 SCC 721;

State of Karnataka & Ors. v. C. Lalitha, reported in (2006) 2 SCC 747 and

Maharaj Krishna Bhatt & Anr. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir reported in (2008) 9 SCC 24.

Learned counsel Ms. R.R.Patel for the respondents submits that Postal Directorate vide OM No.2-25/2019-PCC dated 19.06.2023 (Annexure R/1) had instructed to implement the order dated 02.12.2021 of CAT Hyderabad Bench in OA No. 506/2021 by granting the benefit of Non functional scale of Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- to the eligible members of the All-India Association of Inspectors & Asst. Supdt. of Posts as on 22.07.2021 i.e. date of filing the OA No. 506/2021 and who have completed 04 years regular service in GP of Rs.4800/-. Apropos, out of 52 officers, 37 officers of Gujarat Circle who had completed 04 years of regular service in Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- were granted the said benefits vide order dated 22.07.2021 whereas in respect of the remaining 15 officers, the clarification was sought. In response to such clarification, vide letter dated 27.03.2024 (Annexure-R/4) it was replied that the said benefit was to be conferred upon those IP/ASP cadre eligible officials who were before the Hon'ble Court being the members of the Association as on 22.07.2021 and had completed 4 years' service in GP of Rs.4800/- (L-8) either substantively or by virtue of MACPS or altogether.

Further, it is submitted that the ASPs officers of Gujarat Circle who were not granted the said benefit had approached before this Tribunal by filed OA No. 04/2024 & 80/2024 and this Tribunal while disposing of the OA, issued a direction to the department to consider the representations of the applicants within stipulated time period. In compliance of the said direction, the respondents on the basis of the clarification received from the Postal Directorate and inputs provided by the Nodal Department i.e. the Department of Expenditure (DoE) vide its ID Note No. 6(3)/E.III (B)/2018 dated 26.03.2024, which is impugned in this OA, rejected the representations of the applicants.

Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicants have sought for the relief of grant of Non-functional up-gradation in the Grade Pay of Rs.5400 of Pay Band-2 on completion of four years continuous service in the GP Rs.4800 in terms of the provisions of Clause 1(x)(e) of Department of Expenditure Resolution No.1/1/2008-IC dated 29.08.2008, thereafter, DoE has passed the Resolution dated 29.08.2008 which inter alia provides :

The said Resolution merely reflects the Government's general decision on the recommendations of the 6th CPC, whereas, the specific category-wise, Department-wise, and post-wise pay scales are notified by the Government under Article 309 of the Constitution as separate Rules, namely, 'The Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008'. In respect of the Department of Posts, the revised pay structure mentioned in columns (5) and (6) read as under :

― Part-C, Section II Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts : -

Section-II of Part-B of the First Schedule of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 regarding Office Staff Working in Organizations outside the Secretariat :-

Thus, the Revised Pay Rules, 2008, issued under provisions of Article 309, provided the dual integral pay structure of Grade Pay of Rs.4800 and Rs.5400 (PB-2) on completion 4 years of regular service only for Superintendent of Posts and Sr. Private Secretary in Department of Posts. (Annexure R/5 & Annexure-R/6 respectively).

Thus, placement in Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-2 on completion of four years was not merely as a result of an employee having worked in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- for any reason. Therefore, the applicants herein never have hold the post of Superintendent (Posts)/Sr. Private Secretary on a regular basis, the benefit of placement in GP of Rs. 5400/- on completion of four years as Assistant Superintendent of Posts/ Inspector Posts (in GP of Rs. 4800/-) is not extendable to them.

Further, learned counsel for the respondents submits that even though the benefit of financial up-gradation in the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- after 4 years of service has been allowed by the Hon'ble CAT in OA No. 506/2021 25 supra (as well as by other benches in individual cases) and the High Court of Telangana in WP No. 43155/2022 (supra) by relying upon the judgment dated 06.09.2010, the judgment itself has not been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on merits. It is submitted that the case of M. Subramaniam pertaining to the Department of Revenue and the SLP as well as the Review Petition filed against the judgment dated 06.09.2010 was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the admission stage itself without going into the merits of the case.

It may be stated that, the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in decision rendered in the matter of M. Subramaniam had not dealt with/decided on the observations of the Hon'ble CAT (Annexure-R/7), where, following had been observed:

It is well settled law that, dismissal of SLP by a non-reasoned order does not constitute a law declared by the Supreme Court within Article 141 of the Constitution in view of the following legal precedents :-

(i)(a). Hon'ble Supreme Court had rendered the judgment in the case of V.M.Salgaokar & Bros.(P) Ltd. Vs CIT (2000) 5 SCC 373;

(i)(b) Kunhayammed & Ors Vs State of Kerala & Anr. (2000) 6 SCC 359 (Annexure-R/8) that dismissal of an SLP vide under Article 136 of the Constitution does not amount to upholding of the order passed by the Lower Court against which leave to appeal has been sought.

(ii). The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India Vs M.V.Mohanam Nair decided on 05.03.2020 reported in (2020) 5 SCC421 has held:-

It is submitted that, since, the SLP and the Review Petition filed by the Union of India (through the Department of Revenue) was dismissed without going into the merits of the case, it cannot be urged that, the law has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court qua the matter of Sh. M. Subramaniam. In this regard, it is submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chairman/Managing Director, UP Power Corporation Ltd. & others Vs. Ram Gopal in Civil Appeal No.852/2020 decided on 30.01.2020 and also in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava has laid down the following principles:

Further, it is stated that CAT-Hyderabad Bench vide order dated 02.12.2021 granted the benefit of grade pay of Rs.5400/- (PB-2) in rem. The said order of the Tribunal was challenge before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana and vide order dated 03.01.2023, the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana while partially allowing the Writ Petition No.43155/2022 filed by the Department, which reads as follow :-

Accordingly, as per the direction issued by the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana, the respondents extended the benefits of the Order dated 02.12.2021 passed by the Tribunal only to the those eligible members who had approached the Tribunal.

It is further submitted that though the applicants are seeking relief for the benefit of grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4800 after completion of the four years of service, but the applicants have filed their OA at belated stage and therefore, their claim is barred by delay and latches, as well as, acquiescence as per the settled law.

The respondents relied upon the order passed by the CAT Mumbai Bench vide order dated 06.03.2023 in OA No.405/2021 wherein it has restricted the grant of the benefit to be released for one year prior to filing of the OA. Further, it relied upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chairman/Managing Director, UP Power Corporation Ltd. & others Vs. Ram Gopal in Civil Appeal No.852/2020 decided on 30.01.2020 and in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava. It is further submitted that the aforesaid judgments read along with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of E. K. Paramasivam & Others Vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2003) 12 SCC 270 that grant of this Non-functional upgradation cannot be treated as a continuing cause of action and allow the applicant to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal at any point in time.

Respondents submits that in view of the explanation provided in this reply, the claim of the applicants for the grant of Non- functional grade of Rs. 5400/- (Level-9) from the date of completion of 04 years regular service in grade of Rs. 4800/- (Level8) is against the policy of the Government of India issued in pursuance of the recommendations of the 6th CPC. Hence, prays to dismiss the same.

The finding recorded in the aforesaid Order/Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Madras has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.(S) 8883/2011 vide order dated 10.10.2017, the relevant paras of the same read as under:-

Further, it is required to mention that the Review Petition (Civil) No. 2512/2018 in Civil Appeal No. 8883/2011 preferred by the (appellant therein) respondents herein was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide common order dated 23.8.2018 with the following directions:-

(emphasis supplied)

Therefore, it can be seen that the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras has attained finality on dismissal of the appeal and review filed by the respondents before the Hon’ble Apex Court.

Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Shanti Swaroop S/o Bharat Lal vs. Union of India SCA No. 346/2018 by referring the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and Hon’ble Supreme Court, while causing and setting aside the order passed by this Tribunal in OA No.310/2017 and by accepting the claim of the petitioner against the denial of grant of NFSG in GP Rs.5400/-, the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in para 3 of its judgment dated 10.04.2018 in SCA No. 346/2018 held as under:-

In another identical case, the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in SCA No.10710/2021 (Praveen K. Gokhroo vs. Union of India) vide judgment dated 21.3.2023 by referring the judgment passed by the Madras High Court in the case of M. Subramaniam (supra) had directed the very respondent to grant benefit of NFG in GP of Rs.5400/- to the similarly placed petitioners/officers.

Further this Bench of the Tribunal, in the matter of Shanker Parmar vs. Union of India and others i.e. OA No.403/2022 decided on 22.03.2023 while allowing the identical claim/prayer had referred to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat as also the order passed by the Principal Bench at New Delhi of this Tribunal in OA No.1994/2016 dated 22.2.2023 and taking into consideration the fact that the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras which has attained finality, this Tribunal held that :

Further, by considering the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court and Hon’ble Apex Court, this Tribunal in another identical case, i.e., OA No. 73/2023 decided on 15.01.2025 wherein it has been held that the decision of respondents to withdraw the benefit of grant of GP-Rs. 5400/- to the applicant therein is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and further held that the applicant therein was as such entitled for NFSG in GP of Rs. 5400/- who had completed 4 years of continuous service in GP-Rs. 4800/- irrespective of grant of financial upgradation in GP-4800/-.

It is apt to mention that by following the order passed by Coordinate Bangalore Bench in OA No.41/2025 dated 14.07.2025, (M.R.Kulkarni V/s. Union of India) CAT Principal Bench in identical case passed the order dated 19.12.2025 in OA No.4877/2025 (Surjeet Singh & Ors. V/s. Union of India) wherein taking into consideration the fact that the Department of Post have complied with the order passed by the CAT Bangalore Bench in M.R. Kulkarni (supra), direct the respondents, without influence of the impugned order, to consider the case of the applicant therein for grant of Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- and pass a fresh order by extending the benefits of revised pay forthwith. At this stage, it is also important to mention that undisputedly the department of post have complied with the order passed by the CAT Bangalore bench in M.R.Kulkarni (supra) as well as recent order passed by the CAT Principal Bench in Surjeet Singh (supra) and have extended the benefit of grant of Grade Pay of Rs.5400 to the said applicants. Undisputedly, the applicants herein are also in similarly placed officials and thus their claim for grant of Grade Pay of Rs.5400 is required to be treated equally.