IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.5648 of 2026 DATED: 24.02.2026 Between:

Mr. K.Appa Rao ... Petitioner AND Union of India, Rep. By its Secretary, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY)

(Govt. Of India) Electronics Niketan, 6 CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 & 3 others ... Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Mr. K.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. R.Anurag, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to

4.

2. The order impugned before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Tribunal’) (page 37) is extracted hereunder:

“C-DAC: Corp-HRD/X1/5/2016/AG/2096

21 March, 2016 To, Shri K. Apparao, MTS-B, Centre for Development of Advance Computing, Plot No. 6&7, Hardware Park, Sy No. 1/1, Srisailam Highway, Pahadi Shareef Via (Keshavgiri Post), Hyderabad-500 005 Sub: Your representation dated: 6.12.2016 (appears erroneous) addressed to Honb’le Minister for Communications and IT, received form DeitY Ref: DeitY letter no. 6(3)/2016-ABCD, dated: 1.02.2016 and even letter number dated:

23.02.2016 respectively.

Dear Shri K. Apparao, This is with reference to the captioned representation received from DeitY wherein you have requested C-DAC to consider and grant promotion to Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 from the year 2003, in place of 2010, during which were actually promoted to GP: 4600.

In this regard, we wish to inform you as below:

1. You were appointed in the scale of Rs.5000-8000, as a down operated post, as Technical Assistant in C-DAC Noida, after interviewing for the next higher post, as found suitable by the selection committee. The down operated appointment was accepted by you and you have joined the post on 12.05.1997.

2. In April 2002, you were called for the promotion review but were not promoted as it was not found fit by the review committee. Further you were promoted in the scale of pay of Rs.5500-9000, w.e.f. 01.07.2003, after due review process.

3. Subsequent to the merger of societies, promotion exercise for Below Group ‘A’

S&T staff, resumed in C-DAC only in the year 2010, after your completion of minimum residential period and you were promoted to the next higher scale i.e PB-2 with grade pay of Rs.4,600 (pre-revised scale of Rs.6,500-10,500) w.e.f

01.07.2010.

4. In the year 2015, when you were considered for next promotion, the average ACR ratings were below the minimum required and hence you were not screened in.

As per the facts mentioned above, there is nothing inappropriate observed in your case. Since the same matter raised by you at different forums have been replied/disposed of from time to time, you are advised not to raise same issue time and again at different forums.

It is also observed that you have preferred your representation to higher dignitaries, without routing it through proper channel, which is attributable as misconduct as per the provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules, applicable on you. Therefore, you are advised to restrain yourself from such acts in future.

Thanking You, Yours faithfully, Sd/-

Rái Varghese Director (HRD)”

3 The aforesaid order was based on the representation of the petitioner made on 06.12.2016 questioning his placement in a scale of 5000-8000 (Grade pay 4200) instead of 5500-9000 (Grade pay 4200) on his appointment as Technical Assistant in Electronics Research and Development Centre of India (ER&DCI) in the year 1997. His progression in service career is referred to in para 2 of the impugned order, which is also extracted hereunder:

“2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was called for Interview for the Post of Technical Assistant in Electronics Research and Development Centre of India (ER & DCI) in the Pay Scale of Rs. 1640-2900/- against open Advertisement by 3^rd Respondent in Employment News, dated: 12-18 October, 1996. The applicant submit t