SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 336

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PANKAJ MITHAL, S.V.N. BHATTI, JJ.
Union of India & Others – Appellants
Versus
Sunil Kumar Rai & Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4105 of 2026 [@ SLP (C) No. 11595 of 2023]
Decided On : 01-04-2026

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Ms. Sweksha, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Harshita Choubey, Adv. Ms. Ankita Choudhary Rathi, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anas Tanwir, AOR Mr. Ganesh A. Khemka, Adv. Mr. Shreenath A. Khemka, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Gupta, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv. Mr. Ebad Ur Rahman, Adv. Ms. Masoom Raj Singh, Adv. Ms. Zainab Shaikh, Adv. Mr. Fakhre Alam, Adv. Mr. Kashif Jamal, Adv.

Completion of four years in Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- entitles Junior Engineers to Non-Functional Upgradation to Level 9, contrary to the Respondents' denial based on entry-level Grade Pay criteria.

Headnote:(A) Seventh Central Pay Commission - Para 7.4.13 (iv)(b) - Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) - Junior Engineers of BRO denied NFU to Level 9 based on service at Level 8 - The denial was deemed discriminatory and in contravention of the recommendations regarding eligibility for NFU, specifically the completion of four years in Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- qualifying for NFU to Rs. 5,400/- (Paras 3, 9.6, 12).

(B) Administrative Discretion - The Central Pay Commission’s recommendations are advisory and do not create rights until formal government orders are issued (Paras 5, 6).

(C) Equality - Writ Petitioners’ claims against discrimination when other positions received NFU but not Junior Engineers (Para 9.5).

Facts of the case:
The Writ Petitioners, Junior Engineers, were denied pay upgradation to Level 9 by BRO despite completing four years in Level 8. Their role and entitlements aligned with the recommendations of the Seventh Central Pay Commission.

Findings of Court:
Writ Petitioners are eligible for NFU to Level 9, and the denial by the Respondents was unjustified.

Issues: The key issues centered on the eligibility for NFU based on the completion of service, comparison with other roles, and discrimination in administrative decisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the eligibility for NFU should not be restricted by entry-level Grade Pay and reaffirmed that completion of four years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- entitles the claimants to the NFU benefit.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. background of nfu claims by junior engineers (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments for and against nfu eligibility (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's affirmation of eligibility criteria for nfu (Para 9)
4. final dismissal of appeal and directive for nfu implementation (Para 10)
5. reasoning supporting grant of nfu to junior engineers (Para 11 , 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

S.V.N. BHATTI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The subject matter of the Civil Appeal centres around Para 7.4.13 (iv)(b) of the Seventh Central Pay Commission, and the letter dated 19.02.2021 issued by the Border Road Organization (For short “BRO”), rejecting the claim for extension of Non-Functional Upgradation (For short “NFU”) to Level 9. The excerpts of the above are noted hereunder:

    “Analysis and Recommendations

    7.4.13 The following is recommended:

    i. The VI CPC had recommended that posts carrying minimum qualifications of diploma in engineering should be placed in GP 4200. while those requiring a degree in Engineering should be placed in GP 4600. This Commission is also of a similar view. Accordingly, normal replacement pay scales are recommended.

    ii. The question of change in designations is an administrative one and best left to the discretion of the ministry concerned. Accordingly, no recommendations are made in this regard.

    iii. The issue of MACP does not solely concern the Engineering cadres but affects all Central Government employees. Separate recommendations regarding MACP have been made in Chapter 5.1 of the Report. They will apply to subordinate engineering cadres as well.

    iv. The Commission took note of the issue of stagnation raised by various representative staff associations. Accordingly, the following is recommended:

    a. The concerned ministries should earmark posts in Level 8 equal to 10 percent of total sanctioned strength in Levels 6 and 7 to be filled from subordinate engineering cadre personnel in Levels 6 and 7. 70 percent of such earmarked posts should be filled through promotion from Level 7 while 30 percent should be filled through a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination in which employees from both Levels 6 and 7 would be eligible to compete. This will enable deserving and meritorious employees at Level 6 to jump Level 7 and go directly to Level 8.

    b. 80 percent of the employees in Level 8, will be eligible for non-functional upgrade to Level 9 upon completion of four years in Level 8, on a seniority-cum-suitability basis.”

    “13027/PF/ADGBR(NW)/96/E1A, 19 Feb 2021

    xxx

    CLARIFICATION REGARDING PAY FIXATION: GREF OFFICER

    1. Reference your HQ letter No.028/PF/82/E1A & 028/PF/84/E1A both dt. 12 Feb 2021.

    2. Applications regarding pay fixation in respect of following, officers received vide your HQ letter under ref are returned herewith, as provision of grant of GP Rs.5400/- on completion of 04 years of service was sanctioned for SPS post only & not for AE of BRO as per Min of Shipping, Road TPT & Highways, BRDB letter dated 17 Feb 2009.

    a) GO-004219M AE (Civ) JP Sharma SC of 759 TF

    b) GO-004792H AE (Civ) Sunil Kumar Mishra of HQ CE (P) Deepak.

    Sd/-”

3. The Civil Appeal arises from the Order dated 14.03.2023 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5518 of 2021 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. The parties are referred to as arrayed in the Writ Petition. The Junior Engineers filed Writ Petition No. 5518 of 2021 to enforce their claim for NFU pay at Level 9 (Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400/-). The Writ Petitioners were appointed in the BRO in the Subordinate Engineer Cadre as Overseers, Charge Mechanics and Superintendents. In terms of the Fifth Central Pay Commission recommendations, the posts were merged and redesignated as Junior Engineer(s). As per the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the post of Junior Engineer was placed at Pay Band-2 with a Grade Pay of Rs. 4,200/-. As per the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (For short “MACP”), the next Grade Pay was stipulated at Rs. 4,600/-, Rs. 4,800/-, and Rs. 5,400/-, consequent to the completion of 10, 20, a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top