Promotion to Group-A after policy issuance cannot alone bar consideration under the Group-A promotion policy.

The applicants were initially appointed or promoted to posts below Group-A and were subsequently promoted to Scientist-B, a Group-A post, on 3 November 2016.

They claimed consideration for promotion to Scientist-C under the Group-A S&T promotional policy, contending that completion of the prescribed residency period entitled them to consideration.

The respondents maintained that, because the applicants were promoted to Scientist-B after the Personnel Policy dated 19 September 2016, they fell outside its coverage under paragraph 5(xiv) and were governed instead by the Below Group-A S&T Policy.

The applicants relied on the Tribunal’s decision in OA No. 3393/2023, which addressed the same exclusion.

1. Whether officers initially appointed to Below Group-A S&T posts, but promoted to Scientist-B after 19 September 2016, may be excluded from consideration for further promotion under the Group-A S&T promotional policy solely because of the date of their promotion to Group-A.

2. Whether the applicants are entitled to consideration for further promotion, subject to the prescribed eligibility and suitability requirements.

The Tribunal considered the Personnel Policy for Group-A S&T Officers of MeitY, issued on 19 September 2016, including paragraph 5(xiv), which defined the officers covered by that policy.

It also considered the earlier Below Group-A S&T Policy and the history of the applicable promotion framework, including the DoPT’s Flexible Complementing Scheme of 1998 and Modified Flexible Complementing Scheme of 2010.

Applying its decision in OA No. 3393/2023 dated 12 August 2026, the Tribunal held that paragraph 5(xiv) could not exclude officers validly promoted from Below Group-A to Group-A merely because their promotion occurred after 19 September 2016; that date could not, by itself, operate as an absolute bar to consideration under the applicable Group-A promotional policy.

The applicants’ circumstances were materially identical to those addressed in OA No. 3393/2023: they had been promoted to the Group-A post of Scientist-B after the 2016 policy was issued, and the respondents relied on that timing to deny them consideration under the Group-A promotional hierarchy.

Following its earlier ruling that the policy date alone could not justify exclusion, the Tribunal extended the same relief to these applicants.

It did not direct automatic promotion; consideration remains conditional on educational qualifications, residency, performance assessment, suitability, and other applicable requirements.

The respondents must consider the applicants for further promotion under the applicable Group-A S&T promotional policy without treating their promotion to Scientist-B after 19 September 2016 as an absolute bar.

They must pass consequential orders within three months of receiving the order; pending MAs were disposed of, with no order as to costs.