Central Administrative Tribunal
Employment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

Non-functional Grade Pay of ₹5400 is available after four years' service in Grade Pay ₹4800, including MACP.

Mahendra Kumar Jain vs CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS

Central Administrative TribunalJUDGMENT: May 12, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Non-functional Grade Pay of ₹5400 is available after four years' service in Grade Pay ₹4800, including MACP.. Mahendra Kumar Jain vs CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS. Central Administrative Tribunal. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The three applicants are Superintendents serving under the Central Bureau of Narcotics, Ministry of Finance

Source reference: p. 1

They challenged an impugned communication dated 27.01.2024 which rejected their representation for the grant of a non-functional Grade Pay (GP) of Rs. 5,400/- in Pay Band-2 (PB-2)

Source reference: p. 2

The respondents denied the benefit on the grounds that the applicants were holding substantive posts with a Grade Pay of Rs. 4,600/- and had only reached the Rs. 4,800/- scale through financial upgradation under the MACP/ACP scheme, rather than through regular promotion to a post carrying that scale substantively

Source reference: p. 3

The applicants contended that they were entitled to the higher GP after completing four years of regular service in the GP of Rs. 4,800/-, regardless of how that scale was attained

Source reference: p. 2
02

Issues

Whether Group-B officers who have attained the Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- via financial upgradation (ACP/MACP) are entitled to the non-functional Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400/- upon completion of four years of service in the former scale.

Source reference: p. 3 / para. 4-6
03

Law Applied

The benefit of non-functional Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400/- should be extended to Group-B officers after four years of service in GP Rs. 4,800/-, irrespective of whether that scale was granted substantively or through financial upgradation

Source reference: p. 3-4

Legal principle established by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in M. Subramaniam v. Union of India & Others (W.P. No. 13225/2010), affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and subsequently followed by various benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal, including the Jabalpur Bench in O.A. No. 200/758/2022

Source reference: p. 4
04

Reasoning

The Court examined the respondents' objection that only officers in posts with a "substantive" Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- (like Income Tax Officers or Superintendents in Customs) qualify for the non-functional upgrade

Source reference: p. 3

The Tribunal observed that the issue is no longer res integra (a settled point of law)

Source reference: p. 3

By applying the ratio of M. Subramaniam, the Tribunal reasoned that the distinction between obtaining a grade pay through promotion versus through financial upgradation is irrelevant for the purpose of granting the non-functional GP of Rs. 5,400/- after four years

Source reference: p. 4

Since the applicants had completed four years in the GP of Rs. 4,800/-, they were found to be "similarly situated" to the successful litigants in earlier cited cases

Source reference: para. 6
05

Holding

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application and set aside the impugned communication.

the applicants are entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400/- on a non-functional basis effective from the date they completed four years of regular service in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/-

Source reference: p. 4

The respondents were directed to grant the benefit along with all consequential arrears within 90 days of receipt of the order. No costs were awarded

Source reference: p. 4
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Administrative Tribunals Act, 19851

Central Administrative Tribunal

Original Court PDF

Mahendra Kumar JainvsCENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS

Central Administrative Tribunal · May 12, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment