Level 9 Non-Functional Upgradation is granted after four years in Level 8, irrespective of the employee's initial entry-level pay.

The Respondents, Junior Engineers (JEs) in the Border Road Organization (BRO), were originally inducted into various subordinate engineering cadres and subsequently merged and redesignated as JEs following the Fifth Central Pay Commission (CPC) recommendations

Under the Sixth CPC, the JE post was placed at Level 6 (Grade Pay Rs. 4,200).

The Respondents reached Level 8 (Grade Pay Rs. 4,800) through the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme after completing 20 years of service

Para 7.4.13(iv)(b) of the Seventh CPC recommended that 80% of employees in Level 8 be eligible for Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) to Level 9 (Grade Pay Rs. 5,400) upon completion of four years in Level 8

The Appellants rejected the Respondents' claim for NFU via a letter dated 19.02.2021, contending the benefit only applied to officers whose entry-level Grade Pay was Rs. 4,800

The High Court of Delhi set aside the rejection, ruling that the mode of reaching Level 8 was irrelevant to the eligibility for NFU

1. Whether the benefit of Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) to Level 9 under Para 7.4.13(iv)(b) of the Seventh CPC is restricted to employees whose entry-level Grade Pay was Rs. 4,800, or if it extends to those who reached Level 8 through financial upgradations like MACP

2. Whether the denial of NFU to Junior Engineers, while granting it to Senior Private Secretaries and Assistant Accounts Officers, constitutes arbitrary discrimination

Para 7.4.13(iv)(b) of the Seventh Central Pay Commission recommendations, which stipulates that 80% of employees in Level 8 are eligible for NFU to Level 9 after four years in Level 8 on a seniority-cum-suitability basis

The precedent established in M. Subramaniam v. Union of India (confirmed by the Supreme Court), which held that Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400 must be granted upon completion of four years of continuous service in Grade Pay Rs. 4,800, regardless of whether that grade was achieved through promotion or ACP/MACP

The Court reasoned that a plain reading of Para 7.4.13(iv)(b) does not distinguish between employees who reached Level 8 through direct recruitment, promotion, or financial upgradation under the MACP scheme

The Appellants' attempt to introduce an "entry-level" requirement was rejected as it amounted to adding restrictive conditions not present in the Seventh CPC recommendations

The only condition precedent for the grant of NFU to Level 9 is the completion of four years in Level 8

The Court emphasized that the Respondents were being unfairly discriminated against, as the NFU benefit was being granted to other cadres like Senior Private Secretaries who had identically completed four years in the milestone Grade Pay

The Court found the Appellants’ reliance on Paras 7.4.16 and 7.4.17 (concerning Draughtsmen) misplaced, as the Respondents’ status as Junior Engineers made Para 7.4.13 the applicable recommendation

The Court held that Junior Engineers who have completed four years of service in Level 8 (Grade Pay Rs. 4,800) are entitled to NFU to Level 9 (Grade Pay Rs. 5,400) on a seniority-cum-suitability basis, irrespective of whether they reached Level 8 via promotion or the MACP scheme

The Appellants were directed to pass the necessary orders granting this upgradation to the Respondents