Satya Bir Singh vs M/o Finance on 5 November 2026

O R D E R

AS PER AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER JUDICIAL: Heard the parties at length. THE ISSUE

2. The precise question that arises for our determination in the present Original Application- “Whether the applicant is entitled for placement in Grade Pay Rs.5400 in PB-2 on completion of continuous regular service of four years in the pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500-12000 corresponding to revised pay structure Rs.9300-34800 in Grade Pay Rs.4800 in the Sixth Central Pay Commission pay scales, even if it has been attained on ACP/MACP and not by way of regular promotion, with all consequential benefits?” FACTS IN BRIEF

3. By way of the present O.A., the applicant is seeking direction to grant Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2 as on 01.01.2006 after completion of four years service in GP Rs.4800 in PB-2 (revised) in terms of order dated 06.09.2010 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 13225/2010 in case of M. Subramaniam vs. Union of India & Ors. with all consequential benefits and has invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals, Act, 1985 seeking following reliefs(as extracted from the OA) reads as- “A. Quash Respondent No. 2's directions issued vide its Circular dated 11.02.2009 contrary to the Resolution dated 29.08.2008 issued by Department of Expenditure and CBIC clarification dated 21,11,2008 in accordance with 6*^ CPC's recommendations accepted by the Govt, and letter dated 31.10.2018 issued by Respondent No. 2, vide which the decision dated 10.10.2017 of Hon’ble DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Supreme Court has been treated to be in personam and not in rem denying the benefit of said decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court to the similarly situated officers of Group- B of Customs/CGST and Central Excise etc. B. Direct the Respondents to grant Grade Pay of Rs 5400/- in PB-2 as on 01.01.2006 after completion of 4 years' service in the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- in PB-2 (Revised) to the applicant in terms of the order dated 06.09.2010 passed by Hon'ble Madras High Court in W P No. 13225 of 2010 filed by M. Subramaniam confirming the CBIC clarification dated 21.11,2008 against which Civil Appeal No. 8883 of 2011 filed by UOI was dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10.10.2017 and consequential benefits along with interest be granted to the applicant. C. Direct the Respondents to grant Grade Pay o f Rs 5400/- in PB-2 as on date after completion of 4 years’ regular service in the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- in PB-2 (Revised) to other similarly situated officers of Customs/CGST and Central Excise in terms of the order dated 06.09.2010 passed by Hon’ble Madras High Court in W P No. 13225 of 2010 filed .b y M. Subramaniam confirming the CBIC clarification dated 21.11.2008 against which Civil Appeal No. 8883 of 2011 filed by UOI was dismissed by H on’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10.10.2017, in view of ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Another Vs. Lalita S. Rao and Others 2001 SC 1792, wherein, it has been held that a decision of Court of Law should be implemented for all similarly situated employees whether party or not along with consequential benefits. D. Pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

4. Basic facts that would require notice are not in dispute that the applicant had joined the post of Inspector on 04.06.1985 in Central Excise Commissionerate, Calcutta- II and on inter-Commissionerate transfer, joined Central Excise Commissionerate Delhi on 17.04.1990. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Delhi has granted first ACP w.e.f. 09.08.1999 in pay scale Rs. 6500-200-10500. The applicant was promoted to the post of Superintendent on 23.09.2002. The 6th CPC recommendations accepted by DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Government of India vide Resolution dated 29.08.2008 by Ministry of Finance that Group B Officers of Post, Revenue, etc. after four years of regular service in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000/- (Pre-Revised) corresponding to Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- (Revised Pay) are entitled for GP 5400/- in PB-2 in Non-Functional Grade.

5. The further case of the applicant that applicant was granted Non-Functional Grade in GP 5400 in PB-2 on 23.09.2006 on completion of four years’ of regular service as Superintendent in pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 (Pre- Revised) corresponding to the GP 4800 (Revised Grade Pay) and respondents have fixed the pay of the applicant in GP 5400 PB-2 w.e.f. 23.09.2006 vide order dated 20.04.2010. The applicant is entitled for GP 5400 in PB-2 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 on completion of regular service of four years in Pre-Revised Scale Rs. 7500-12000 but same has not been granted w.e.f. 01.01.2006 due to clarification dated 11.02.2009. The clarification dated 11.02.2009 was already considered in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) and the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) has held that on completion of four years of regular service in GP 4800 PB-2, irrespective of whether GP 4800 was granted by way of promotion or ACP or MACP, the clarification dated 11.02.2009 has become DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

void. Hence, clarification dated 21.11.2008 stands restored. The applicant is seeking grant of NFG from date of completion of four years’ regular service in GP 4800 (Pre-Revised 7500-12000).

6. Per contra, the respondents have filed counter reply stating that the Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs has examined and taken up the matter with Department of Expenditure and clarification dated 21.11.2008 was issued stating that four years’ period is to be counted from the date on which an Officer is actually placed in Pay Scale of Rs. 7500-12000 (Pre-Revised). The Officer who has completed four years on 01.01.2006 or earlier will be given the Non-Functional Upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and the Officer who has completed four years after 01.01.2006 shall be granted NFU from such date on which he completes four years in Pay Scale of Rs. 7500- 12000 (Pre-Revised). The respondents have further made averments in the counter reply that in case of M. Subramaniam (supra), the said case is related to NFG of Rs. 5400 in PB-2 to those Inspectors who were granted GP 4800 due to ACP/MACP scheme and the said judgment was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and review filed by the department was also dismissed. The Board has examined the case of M. Subramaniam (supra) and the DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

said judgment is a judgment in personam and not in rem as same was delivered based on specific facts and circumstances of such case and law laid down in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) is not applicable to the present case due to peculiar facts and circumstances.

SUBMISSIONS

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued and can be summarized as-

(i) Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) vide judgment in identical facts and legal issue is judgment in rem and as per CCS (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2008 [in short Rules, 2008] notified in Gazette and incorporated in Rules, 2008, the applicant is entitled for placement in GP Rs.5400/- in Pay Band-2 on N.F.U. after four years in regular service in pre-revised scale Rs.7500-12000 to corresponding PB-2 in GP Rs.4800 in revised pay scale as per 6th CPC pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, with all consequential benefits.

(ii) Applicant is serving in Ministry of Revenue, as Inspector, Group B post, since 04.06.1985 and has been granted first ACP on 09.08.1999 in pay scale of Rs 6500-200-10500. The applicant, on receipt of first ACP in G.P. 4800 in PB-2 (Revised Pay Scale and in Pre-Revised Scale of Rs. 7500-12000 as on 01.01.1999, the applicant is entitled for G.P. Rs 5400 in PB-2 DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

w.e.f. 01.01.2006 on completion of continuous regular service of 4 years in G.P. 4800 in PB-2 in corresponding pre-revised scale of Rs. 7500- 12000 instead of from 23.09.2006.

(iii) The factual matrix as well as legal issue involved in the present case is no more res- integra, already attained finality in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) and in case of Sushil Kumar (supra). The Resolution dated 29.8.2008 does not place any embargo on entitlement of those Group B officers, who are having the G.P of Rs 4800 by way of ACP/MACP.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents argued and reiterated the stand taken in the counter reply, can be summarized as-

(i) Applicant is claiming grant of Non-Functional Upgradation in G.P. 5400 in PB-2 in light of law laid down in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) and same is a judgment in personam and not in rem.

(ii) The Central Board of Excise and Customs has taken up the matter with Department of Expenditure and clarification dated 21.11.2008 was issued that the 4 years’ period is to be counted from the date on which an Officer is actually placed in pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 (Pre-Revised) and on completion of 4 years’ service on 01.01.2006 or earlier, he will be given Non-Functional Upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and if the officer completes 4 years DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

on date after 01.01.2006, he will be given Non- Functional Upgradation from such date on which he completes 4 years in pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 (Pre-Revised).

(iii) The applicant has been placed in G.P. 4800 due to ACP/MACP and judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) is judgment in personam and not in rem and not applicable in the present facts and circumstances.

(iv) In M. Subramaniam (supra), Hon’ble High Court of Madras has accepted the argument and directed to grant of NFU after completion of 4 years regular service in G.P. Rs 4800/- achieved by ACP/MACP. The interpretation of clarification regarding grant of NFU to Group B officer not been properly construed. The officers in GP Rs 4800 by ACP/MACP will not be entitled for benefits of further NFU to pre- revised pay-scale Rs 8000-13500 (corresponding scale of Grade Pay of Rs 5400/-, PB-2) on completion of 4 years in the pre- revised pay-scale of Rs. 7500-12000( Corresponding G.P. 4800/-, PB-2). ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

9. Heard with consent. We have heard Mr. Sourabh Ahuja, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Rajeev Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material placed on record. DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

RULE OF LAW

10. To appreciate the issue arising in the present OA, it will be necessary to notice the relevant provisions of Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure’s Resolution published in Gazette of India dated 29th August, issued on consideration to the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission recommended revised scales of pay and from pre-revised scale Rs.7500-250-12000 to revised pay scale by 6th CPC in revised pay structure as Pay Band-2 in corresponding Pay Bands Rs.9300-34800 in Grade Pay Rs. 4800 and further pre-revised pay scale Rs.8000-275-13500 to revised pay Rs.9300-34800, PB-2 plus Grade Pay Rs.5400.

11. The Sixth CPC recommendations have been accepted vide Resolution dated 29.08.2008, as a package subject to the modifications. So also regarding Group-B cadres the Commission’s recommendations will be modified in the following manner:- “(e) Group-B officers of Departments of Posts, Revenue, etc. will be granted Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in Pay Band-2 on non-functional basis after four years of regular service in the Grade Pay of Rs.4800 in PB-2”. [Emphasis supplied]

12. We have already extracted relevant Gazette notification dated 29.08.2008. As evident from the DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Resolution dated 29.08.2008, extracted herein above, applicable in the controversy involved in the case in our hand. The essence of NFU is to provide financial upgradation having stagnated in particular pay scale for four years of service as a reward as assured career progression. CASE-LAW

13. Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No.13225/2010 titled M.Subramaniam Versus Union of India & Ors., decided on 06.09.2010. Their Lordships was seisin with identical issue and in identical facts as involved in this case in our hands, seeking direction to respondents to grant the Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2 and consequential benefits with effect from 01.01.2006 or on completion of four years in pre-revised pay scale Rs.7500-12000 in revised PB-2 in GP Rs.4800 on grant of ACP/financial upgradations, as per orders of Govt. of India accepting the 6th CPC recommendations. Their Lordships also taken into consideration Govt. of India Clarification dated 21.11.2008 issued by CBEC regarding grant of NFU of Group “B” officers that once applicants drawing the pay scale attached to the posts by virtue of financial upgradations in ACP/MACP Scheme and therefore they are not entitled to get the GP Rs.5400 on DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

the basis of completion of four years of regular service in pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500-12000 (Revised PB-2 in GP Rs.4800). Their Lordships held that once respondents/GOI accepted 6th CPC recommendations and issued a Resolution dated 29.08.2008 granting GP Rs.5400 to the Group-B officers in PB-2 on non-functional basis after four years of regular service in GP Rs.4800 in PB-2 and denial of benefits on clarifications without amending Rules, 2008 for revised pay scale and such communications/clarifications cannot be accepted. The relevant paragraph nos. 6 to 9 read as under:- “6. It is not in dispute that the Government of India vide its resolution, dated 29.8.2008 granted grade pay of Rs 5400/- in Pay Band 2 on non- functional basis to the Group B Officers of the Department of Posts, Revenue, etc. who completed four years of regular service in the grade pay of Rs.4800/- in Pay Band 2. According to the petitioner, he has already reached the pay scale of Rs.7500-250-12000 by way of ACP Scheme on 1.1.2004 which is corresponding to the pay scale of Superintendent of Central Excise (Group B Post) and therefore, on completion of four years, he is entitled to the grade pay of Rs.5400/- with effect from 1.1.2008. In support of his claim, the petitioner also relied upon a clarification issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs in Letter F.No.A2601/98/2008-AdIIA, dated 21.11.2008 clarifying that the four year period is to be counted from the date on which an officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000. However, the claim of the petitioner was denied based on the clarification issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, dated 11.2.2009, wherein, it was clarified that the officers who got the pre-revised pay-scale of Rs.7500-12000 (corresponding to grade pay of Rs.4800) by virtue of financial upgradation under ACP would not be entitled to the benefit of further non-functional upgradation to the pre-revised pay-scale of Rs.8,000-13,500 (Corresponding to grade pay of DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Rs.5400) on completion of 4 years in the pre- revised pay scale of Rs.7500-12000.

7. We are unable to agree with this clarification given by the Under Secretary to Government of India, since in an earlier clarification, dated 21.11.2004 of the Deputy Secretary to Government of India, it was clarified as to how the 4 year period is to be counted for the purpose of granting non-functional upgradation to Group-B Officer, i.e. Whether the 4-year period is to be counted with effect from the date on which an officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs.7, 500- 12000. (Pre-revised) or with effect from 1.1.2006, i.e. the date on which the recommendation of the 6th CPC came into force. It was clarified that the 4-year period is to be counted with effect from the date on Which an officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs. 7,500-12000 (pre-revised).

8. Thus, if the officer has completed 4-years on 1.1.2006 or earlier, he will be given the non- functional upgradation with effect from 1.1.2006 and if the officer completes 4-year on a date after such 1.1.2006, he will be given non-functional upgradation from such date on which he completes 4-year in the pay scale of Rs.7,500- 12,000 (pre-revised), since the petitioner admittedly completed 4-year period in the pay scale of Rs.7500- 12000 as on 1.1.2008, he is entitled to grade pay of Rs.5400/-. In fact, the Government of India, having accepted the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, issued a resolution dated 29.8.2008 granting grade pay of Rs.5400/- to the Group B Officers in pay Band 2 on non-functional basis after four years of regular service in the grade pay of Rs. 4800/ – in pay band 2. Therefore, denial of the same benefit to the petitioner based on the clarification issued by the Under Secretary to the Government was contrary to the above said clarification and without amending the rules of the revised pay scale, such decision cannot be taken. Therefore, we are inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal.

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the order of the Tribunal, dated 19.4.2010 passed in O.A.No.167 of 2009. The respondents are directed to extend the benefit of grade pay of Rs.5400/- to the petitioner from 1.1.2008 as per the resolution dated 29. 8. 2010. No costs.”

[Emphasis supplied] DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

14. Respondents filed Civil Appeal No.8883/2011 titled Union of India & Ors. vs. M.Subramaniam before Hon’ble Supreme Court challenging order dated 06.09.2010 in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras and Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed the same on 10.10.2017 and review petition also has been dismissed on 23.08.2018 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court holding that officers who have completed four years of service in Pay Band-2 GP Rs.4800 to be granted NFG of GP Rs.5400 in PB-2 irrespective of the cadre.

15. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in similar facts and issue in the case in W.P. (C) 690/2022 titled Sushil Kumar Vs. Union of India & Ors, seeking benefit of NFU in Grade Pay Rs. 5400/- w.e.f the date of him being eligble for the same alongwith arrears and consequential benefits. Applicant was granted the benefit of MACP with G.P Rs. 4800/- in the Group “B” post and completed 4 years of service in a Grade Pay of Rs 4800/- as on 05.07.2019. The respondents denied the benefits to those officers who had been placed in the G.P. Rs 4800/- by virtue of pay upgradation under ACP but were not holding the substantive post carrying the G.P. Rs 4800. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, considered the ratio laid down in case of DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

M. Subramaniam (supra), directing the govt to extend the benefits of financial upgradation in NFU grade Pay of Rs 5400 to even those Group B officers who had rendered four years of service after being placed in the G.P. Rs 4800/- by virtue of upgradation under the ACP scheme. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, allowed the petition and set- aside impugned Order. The respondents are directed to extend the benefits of NFU in the G.P. Rs 5400/- as per Resolution dated 29.08.2008 issued by the Ministry of Finance to the petitioner w.e.f. 06.07.2019, on which date he completed four years of service in the G.P. Rs 4800/- alongwith arrears. The SLP(C) in case of UOI vs Sushil Kumar stands dismissed vide Order dated 17.04.2025 and judgment in case of Sushil Kumar (supra) has attained finality.

16. In case of Sushil Kumar (supra). Relevant paragraphs 11 to 14 for ready reference reproduced as under- “11. Since it is an admitted position that not only the appeal assailing decision of the Madras High Court in M. Subramaniam (supra) stands rejected but even the Review Petition (C) no. 2519 of 2018 also stands rejected by the Apex Court, it would be apposite to refer to the order dated 23.08.2018 whereby the review petition was dismissed by the Apex Court. The same reads as under:- "There is a delay of 357 days in filing Review Petition (C) No.2512 of 2018 and 264 days in filing Review Petition (C) No.2519 of 2018. The challenge to the clarification issued by the Ministry of Finance clarifying that non- DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

functional Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- would not be granted to such of those officers who had got the Grade pay of Rs.4,800/- on upgradation under ACP Scheme, was accepted by the High Court and the writ petition preferred by the respondent was allowed. While dismissing the special leave petitions filed at the instance of the present review petitioners this court did not find any ground to interfere. We have gone through the review petitions and do not find any error apparent on the face of record. These review petitions are, therefore, dismissed both on the ground of delay as well as on merits."

12. Even otherwise, having perused the resolution dated 29.08.2008 issued by the Ministry of Finance, we find that the provision for NFU in the grade pay of Rs. 5,400/- in PB-3 for Group-B officers with four years of service in grade pay of Rs. 4,800/- does not prescribe that those drawing the said grade pay by way of ACP or MACP schemes would not be eligible for the said benefit. In our considered view, when the resolution dated 29.08.2008 does not place any embargo on the entitlement of those Group-B officers, who are drawing the grade pay of Rs. 4,800/- by way of ACP/MACP schemes, the respondents could not have placed a condition that the grant of NFU would be restricted to those drawing grade pay of Rs. 4,800/- by way of promotion.

13. We, therefore, find no justification on the part of the respondents in denying the benefit of NFU in the grade pay of Rs. 5,400/- to the petitioner, who was admittedly drawing the grade pay of Rs. 4,800/- w.e.f. 06.07.2015 only on the ground that he was drawing the said grade pay by way of MACP scheme. The impugned order passed by the respondents rejecting the petitioner’s claim for grant of NFU in grade pay of Rs. 5,400/- in PB-3 w.e.f. 06.07.2019, the date when he completed four years of service in the grade pay of Rs. 4,800/-, is, therefore, wholly unsustainable.

14. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 24.09.2021. The respondents are directed to extend the benefit of NFU in the grade pay of Rs. 5,400/- in PB-3 as per the resolution dated 29.08.2008 issued by the Ministry of Finance to the petitioner w.e.f. 06.07.2019, on which date he completed four years of service in the grade pay of Rs. 4,800/-. The exercise in terms of this order will be completed within eight weeks and arrears, as found payable to the petitioner, will be released to him within four weeks thereafter. (emphasis supplied) DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

17. The D.B. of this Tribunal in identical case titled Brijendra Singh Verma Vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Custom in OA No 570/2014, CAT, Principal Bench vide Order dated 18.04.2024 held that judgment in case of M. Subramanian vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) dated 06.09.2010 passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras be treated as judgment in rem and benefits be extended to all the similarly situated persons and directed to consider claim of applicants for grant of GP Rs.5400 in PB-2 on completion of four years of service in GP Rs. 4800/- on the analogy verbatim above and implement judgment in rem in case of M. Subramaniam (supra).

18. In case of Deepak B. Deshmukh and 4 Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., in OA No.373/2020 and other connected matters, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Bench Mumbai, Mumbai vide common order dated 20.03.2024 allowed the OAs holding that persons similarly situated should be treated similarly in view of the settled principles of service jurisprudence.

19. In case of Ravi Dutt Shankar Vs. Union of India & Ors. in OA No.3768/2018 (Delhi) vide order dated 06.01.2022, this Tribunal in detail, dealt similar contentions and also considered Ministry of Finance, DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Department of Revenue (CBITC) letter dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure R-2) and allowed the OA considering judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras.

20. Hira Lal & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors, OA No 4076/2024 vide order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Tribunal at Delhi, dealt with identical issue and similar contentions of learned counsel for the respondents. Relevant paragraphs 15 to 19 reads as under- “15. In case of Ravi Dutt Shankar Vs. Union of India & Ors. in OA No.3768/2018 (Delhi) vide order dated 06.01.2022, this Tribunal in detail, dealt similar contentions and also considered Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (CBITC) letter dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure R-2) and allowed the OA considering judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras.

16. In case of State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. C. Lalitha, (2006) 2 SCC 747, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly only because one person has approached the court that would not mean that persons situated should be treated differently.

17. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others Vs. Arvind Kumar Shrivastava & Ors., (2015) 1 SCC 347. Their Lordships held that in those cases where judgment pronounced by the Court was judgment in rem with intention to give benefits to all similarly situated persons, whether they approached the court or not. With such a pronouncement the obligation is cast upon the authorities to itself extend the benefit thereof to all similarly situated persons.

18. Now again coming to the case in our hand, from the Gazette Notification dated 29.08.2009, Resolution, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, the Sixth Central Pay Commission recommendations accepted as a package subject to the modifications and Group-B officers DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

of Department of Posts, Revenue etc. will be granted Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2 on non-functional basis after four years of regular service in the Grade Pay Rs.4800 in PB-2. In view of the above extracted relevant provision, the applicants – Group-B officers in Department of Revenue etc. on completion of continuous service of four years in pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500- 12000 corresponding to revised pay scale as per 6th CPC in PB-2 in GP Rs.4800 are entitled for placement in Grade Pay Rs.5400 in PB-2 scale Rs.9300-34800 in pre- revised scale Rs.8000-13500 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 after completing four years regular service in pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500-12000 (in revised pay structure in PB-2 / scale in GP Rs.4800).

19. There is another aspect of the matter in our hand that Ministry of Finance vide letter dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure R/2) stating the benefits shall not be extended of the judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) to all similarly placed officers, whereas similar clarifications already been dealt in case of M. Sumbramaniam (supra) and in identical cases by Co- ordinate Benches of this Tribunal and by this Tribunal in OA No.3768/2018 Ravi Dutt Shankar decided on 06.01.2022 and after placing reliance in case of Brijendra Singh Verma vs. CBITC & Ors. in OA No.570/2024 (Delhi) decided vide order dated 18.04.2024 allowed the OA directing the respondents to treat judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) of Hon’ble High Court of Madras is judgment in rem and the benefits should be extended to all similarly situated persons for grant of GP Rs. 5400 in PB-2 on completion of four years of service in GP Rs.4800 PB-II with all consequential benefits. (emphasis supplied)

21. In case of State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. C. Lalitha, (2006) 2 SCC 747, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly only because one person has approached the court that would not mean that persons situated should be treated differently. DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

22. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others Vs. Arvind Kumar Shrivastava & Ors., (2015) 1 SCC 347. Their Lordships held that in those cases where judgment pronounced by the Court was judgment in rem with intention to give benefits to all similarly situated persons, whether they approached the court or not. With such a pronouncement the obligation is cast upon the authorities to itself extend the benefit thereof to all similarly situated persons.

23. Now again coming to the facts and circumstances in case in our hand, the applicant joined as direct recruit as Inspector, Grade B under Central Excise Commissionerate, Calcutta-II and transferred on own request to Central Excise Commissionerate, Delhi on 17.04.1990. The applicant was granted benefits of first ACP vide order dated 14.11.1999 and placed in pay scale of Rs. 6500-200-10500 (Pre-Revised) w.e.f. 09.08.1999. Thereafter, applicant was granted NFG in G.P. 5400 in PB- 2, Rs. 9300-34800 w.e.f. 23.09.2006, as evident from order dated 20.04.2010. Admittedly, the applicant has been placed in Pre-Revised scale of Rs. 7500-12000 in G.P. 4800 PB-2 (Pre-Revised) on 08.09.1999. The resolution dated 29.08.2009 issue by Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, the Sixth Central Pay DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

Commission recommendations accepted as a package subject to the modifications and Group-B officers of Department of Posts, Revenue etc. will be granted Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2 on non-functional basis after four years of regular service in the Grade Pay Rs.4800 in PB-2. In view of the above extracted relevant provision, the applicants – Group-B officer in Ministry of Home Affairs etc. on completion of continuous service of four years in pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500-12000 corresponding to revised pay scale as per 6th CPC in PB-2 in GP Rs.4800 are entitled for placement in Grade Pay Rs.5400 in PB-2 scale Rs.9300-34800 in pre-revised scale Rs.8000-13500 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 after completing four years regular service in pre-revised scale of pay Rs.7500-12000 (in revised pay structure in PB-2 / scale in GP Rs.4800).

24. The applicant has been placed in Pre-Revised Scale Pay of Rs. 7500-12000 in Revised G.P. 4800 in PB-2 on 08.09.1999 and is entitled for Non-Functional Grade being Group B Officer with G.P. Rs. 5400 in PB-2 after completion of 4 years of regular service in Revised G.P. 4800 in Rs. 9300-34800 w.e.f. 01.01.2006.

25. There is another aspect of the matter in our hand that Ministry of Finance vide letter dated 07.04.2021 DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

stating the benefits shall not be extended of the judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) to all similarly placed officers, whereas similar clarifications already been dealt in case of M. Sumbramaniam (supra) and in identical cases by Co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal and by this Tribunal in OA No.3768/2018 Ravi Dutt Shankar decided on 06.01.2022 and after placing reliance in case of Brijendra Singh Verma vs. CBITC & Ors. in OA No.570/2024 (Delhi) decided vide order dated 18.04.2024 allowed the OA directing the respondents to treat judgment in case of M. Subramaniam (supra) of Hon’ble High Court of Madras is judgment in rem and the benefits should be extended to all similarly situated persons for grant of GP Rs. 5400 in PB-2 on completion of four years of service in GP Rs.4800 PB-II with all consequential benefits.

26. What comes out loud and clear is that the applicant has been granted benefits of ACP/MACP in GP Rs. 4800, PB-2 w.e.f. 09.08.1999 and respondents have not placed him in GP Rs. 5400, PB-2 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 after four years of regular service in pre-revised scale of pay Rs. 7500-12000 corresponding to revised pay scale as per 6th CPC in GP Rs. 4800, PB-2. The Government of India, having accepted the 6th CPC recommendations and issued DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

resolution dated 29.08.2008 granting pre-revised scale Rs. 8000-13500 corresponding to revised scale of pay as 6th CPC to Grade Pay Rs 5400, PB-2 to the Group “B” officers on the non-functional basis after four years of regular service in GP Rs 4800 in PB-2. Therefore, denial of the said benefits to the applicant based on clarification dated 21.11.2008 without amending the rules for revised pay scale is arbitrary and illegal and the respondents are directed to extend benefits of GP Rs. 5400,PB-2 after completion of four years regular service in GP 4800, PB-2 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 with arrears along with all consequential benefits.

CONCLUSION

27. We have already analyzed the issue and in light of aforesaid analysis and findings on issue, the issue is decided in favour of the applicant. The applicant is held entitled for grant of Grade Pay Rs.5400 in Pay Band-2 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 on non-functional basis from the date he had completed four years of regular service in Grade Pay Rs.4800 in PB-2, arrears with all consequential benefits. The respondents are directed to verify so far relates to the applicant in the OA and comply with the order, within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order and arrears, as found payable to the applicant DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA

shall be released to him within four weeks thereafter, failing which same shall carry interest applicable at GPF rates from the date of entitlement to the date of date of actual payment.

28. Resultantly, Original Application is accordingly allowed in the above indicated terms.

29. Three shall be no orders as to costs.

30. As a sequel thereof, pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Ajay Pratap Singh) (Sanjeeva Kumar) Member (J)

Member (A)

/dhruv/ DHRUV MEHRA

DHRUV MEHRA