Salary-Calculator.in

Stepping up of pay

Stepping up of pay raises a senior's pay to a junior's when promotion fixation leaves the senior drawing less, under FR 22(I)(a)(1) and DoPT 2018 guidelines.

Updated 17 July 2026 · Reviewed by Salary-Calculator.in

Stepping up of pay is the remedy for an unfair result that the pay rules can throw up: a senior central government employee whose pay, after promotion , ends up lower than that of a junior promoted later to the same post. When that happens, the senior’s pay in the higher post is raised, or stepped up, to a figure equal to the junior’s, so that the senior is never left drawing less than someone they outrank. It is granted under Fundamental Rule 22(I)(a)(1), read with Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 , and the consolidated guidelines the Department of Personnel and Training issued on 26 October 2018.

The anomaly is not a mistake in anyone’s pay; it is a by-product of how pay is fixed on promotion. Because pay fixation on promotion gives an increment on the pay drawn in the lower post at the moment of promotion, a junior promoted later, after drawing an extra annual increment in the feeder grade, can land at a higher cell in the higher level than a senior promoted earlier. Stepping up corrects that, but only within tightly drawn conditions, and this article sets them out in full, along with the situations where stepping up is refused, the position on MACP , what happens to the date of next increment , and how to claim it.

The anomaly stepping up removes

Suppose two employees are in the same cadre and the same level , with the senior above the junior. The senior is promoted first. On promotion the senior gets one increment on the feeder pay and is placed at the appropriate cell in the higher level. Some months later the junior, still in the feeder grade, draws the ordinary annual increment, and is then promoted. Because the junior’s feeder pay is now higher, the junior’s promotion fixation lands at a higher cell in the same higher level than the senior currently occupies.

The result offends common sense: the junior, promoted later, draws more in the higher post than the senior promoted earlier. Stepping up removes exactly this anomaly, by lifting the senior’s pay to the junior’s from the date the junior was promoted. It is a parity rule, not a bonus: it never gives the senior more than the junior, only the same.

The governing rule and order

Stepping up flows from Fundamental Rule 22(I)(a)(1), the rule that governs pay fixation on promotion , read with Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016. The DoPT gathered the scattered instructions into a single consolidated order, OM No. 4/3/2017-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 26 October 2018, framed for the 7th CPC pay matrix. That order supersedes the older instructions, including the Department of Expenditure’s 1966 order and the DoPT’s 1993 order, and it is the reference point for any stepping-up claim today.

The rule states, in substance, that to remove the anomaly of a Government servant promoted or appointed to a higher post on or after 1 January 2016 drawing lower pay in that post than a junior promoted or appointed subsequently to an identical post, the senior’s pay in the higher post is stepped up to a figure equal to the pay fixed for the junior, from the date of the junior’s promotion or appointment.

The conditions for stepping up

Stepping up is allowed only where all three of the following are satisfied:

  1. Same cadre, identical posts. The senior and the junior belong to the same cadre, and the posts to which they are promoted are identical and in the same cadre.
  2. Identical levels. The pay-matrix level of the lower post and of the higher post is identical for the two employees.
  3. A genuine FR 22 anomaly. The anomaly is a direct result of pay fixation on promotion under FR 22(I)(a)(1) read with Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016.

There is one important express bar attached to the conditions: if the junior draws more pay only because of advance increments granted to them, stepping up is not invoked. The point of stepping up is to cure an anomaly created by the promotion machinery, not to match a junior who is ahead for a different reason.

When stepping up is not admissible

The 2018 guidelines list situations where a junior drawing more does not count as an anomaly, so stepping up is refused. The main ones are:

  • Extraordinary leave by the senior. Where the senior took extraordinary leave that postponed the senior’s date of next increment , so the senior was already drawing less than the junior in the lower grade itself.
  • Refusing or delaying promotion. Where the senior forwent or refused promotion, so the junior was promoted earlier and drew higher pay.
  • Joining the higher post later. Where the senior joined the higher post later than the junior, for any reason, and so started at a lower stage.
  • Appointed later in the lower post. Where the senior was appointed later than the junior in the feeder grade itself, and so drew less there.
  • Direct recruit versus promotee. Where the junior is a direct recruit whose pay is fixed at the minimum of the level under Rule 8, while the senior’s pay is fixed on promotion under FR 22; the two are fixed under different rules and are not compared.
  • Ad-hoc service. Where the higher pay arises from ad-hoc or officiating service, which is reversible.
  • Advance or qualification increments. Where the junior draws more because of advance increments, or additional increments for acquiring higher qualifications.

These instances are illustrative, not exhaustive; the common thread is that the junior’s higher pay must trace directly to the promotion fixation, not to leave, seniority in the feeder grade, recruitment mode, or a personal increment.

MACP and stepping up

The position on the Modified Assured Career Progression scheme is a two-part rule. No stepping up is admissible where a junior draws more than a senior only on account of pay fixation under the MACP scheme itself. But stepping up is admissible where the anomaly on a MACP upgradation results from the application of FR 22 or another pay-fixation rule or order, subject to the same advance-increment bar. In short, an anomaly born of the MACP fixation is not cured by stepping up, while an anomaly born of the ordinary promotion rule is, even if it surfaces around a MACP event.

The date of next increment after stepping up

Stepping up re-fixes the senior’s pay, and the re-fixation order is issued under Fundamental Rule 27. The senior then draws the next increment on completion of the required qualifying service, reckoned from the date of re-fixation. The practical effect is that the senior’s increment date is re-aligned to the stepping-up date, so the parity with the junior holds going forward and does not slip away at the next increment. Because the increment cycle shifts, an employee should check the revised date of next increment recorded after a stepping-up order, since it governs every future increment.

How to claim stepping up

Stepping up is not automatic; the senior must ask for it. The steps are:

  1. Identify the anomaly: the junior in the same cadre and level who, after a later promotion, is drawing more in the identical higher post.
  2. Submit a representation to the head of office, giving the junior’s name, the promotion dates, and the pay of both.
  3. Verification: the office checks that the three conditions are met and that none of the excluded situations applies.
  4. Re-fixation order: the competent authority issues an order under FR 27 stepping up the senior’s pay to the junior’s, from the date of the junior’s promotion, and records the revised increment date.

If the office declines, the usual course is a representation up the line and, if needed, the Central Administrative Tribunal , since stepping up is a settled entitlement where the conditions are met.

A worked example

Take two employees in Level 7, both drawing Rs. 47,600, with the senior above the junior.

  • The senior is promoted to Level 8 on 1 January 2024. One increment on the feeder pay takes Rs. 47,600 to Rs. 49,000, and the senior is placed in Level 8 at Rs. 49,000. The senior’s next increment is due on 1 January 2025.
  • The junior stays in Level 7, draws the ordinary increment on 1 July 2024 to Rs. 49,000, and is then promoted to Level 8 on 1 August 2024. One increment on Rs. 49,000 gives Rs. 50,500, and the junior is placed in Level 8 at Rs. 50,500 from that date.

On 1 August 2024 the junior, promoted later, draws Rs. 50,500 while the senior draws Rs. 49,000. That is the anomaly. Under the stepping-up rule the senior’s pay is raised to Rs. 50,500 with effect from 1 August 2024, the date of the junior’s promotion, by an order under FR 27, and the senior’s next increment is then regulated from that re-fixation. The senior never draws less than the junior again.

The 8th Central Pay Commission

Stepping up as described here rests on FR 22(I)(a)(1), Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, and the 2018 consolidated guidelines. The 8th Central Pay Commission , constituted in November 2025, will on implementation issue fresh revised-pay rules, and the pay-fixation and stepping-up machinery will be read against those rules once notified. The principle that a senior should not draw less than a junior in an identical post is long-standing and is expected to continue, but the exact fixation mechanics should be checked against the new rules when they arrive.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is stepping up of pay?
Stepping up of pay is the remedy for a senior central government employee whose pay, after promotion, is fixed lower than that of a junior promoted later to an identical post. The senior’s pay in the higher post is raised, or stepped up, to a figure equal to the junior’s, with effect from the date of the junior’s promotion. It is granted under Fundamental Rule 22(I)(a)(1) read with Rule 13 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules 2016 and the DoPT consolidated guidelines of 26 October 2018.
What are the conditions for stepping up of pay?
Three conditions must all be met: the senior and the junior belong to the same cadre and are promoted to identical posts in that cadre; the pay-matrix level of both the lower and the higher post is identical for the two; and the anomaly is a direct result of pay fixation on promotion under FR 22(I)(a)(1) read with Rule 13. Stepping up is not allowed if the junior draws more only because of advance increments.
When is stepping up of pay not allowed?
It is not allowed where the junior’s higher pay is not a genuine promotion anomaly, for example where the senior took extraordinary leave that postponed the senior’s increment, where the senior refused or delayed promotion, where the senior joined the higher post later than the junior, where the junior is a direct recruit fixed at the minimum of the level, where the pay difference is from ad-hoc service, or where the junior earns more from advance increments or additional increments for higher qualifications.
Does stepping up apply to MACP?
Partly. No stepping up is allowed where a junior draws more than a senior only because of pay fixation under the MACP scheme. But stepping up is allowed where the anomaly on a MACP upgradation results from the application of FR 22 or another pay-fixation rule, subject to the same advance-increment bar. The distinction is whether the anomaly comes from the MACP fixation itself or from the ordinary promotion rule.
What happens to the date of next increment after stepping up?
After the pay is stepped up, the re-fixation order is issued under Fundamental Rule 27, and the senior draws the next increment on completion of the required qualifying service reckoned from the date of re-fixation. In effect the senior’s increment date is re-aligned to the stepping-up date, so that the parity with the junior is preserved going forward rather than only on the day of stepping up.
How do I claim stepping up of pay?
The senior submits a representation to the head of office, identifying the junior who is drawing more and the promotion that caused the anomaly. The office verifies that the three conditions are met and that none of the excluded situations applies, and the competent authority then issues a re-fixation order under FR 27 stepping up the senior’s pay to the junior’s, from the date of the junior’s promotion.

External references

References

  1. Fundamental Rule 22(I)(a)(1), read with Rule 13 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 (fixation of pay on promotion), the basis on which the stepping-up anomaly arises and is cured.
  2. Department of Personnel and Training, Office Memorandum No. 4/3/2017-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 26 October 2018, consolidated guidelines on stepping up of pay of a senior drawing less than a junior on pay fixation, framed for the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, superseding the Department of Expenditure OM No. F.2(78)-E.III(A)/63 dated 2 February 1966 and the DoPT OM No. 4/7/92-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 4 November 1993.
  3. The three conditions for stepping up (same cadre and identical posts; identical pay-matrix levels; anomaly a direct result of FR 22(I)(a)(1)) and the bar where the junior draws more by virtue of advance increments.
  4. The MACP position: no stepping up where the anomaly is due to MACP pay fixation, but stepping up admissible where it results from FR 22 or another pay-fixation rule on a MACP upgradation, subject to the advance-increment bar.
  5. Fundamental Rule 27 (re-fixation of pay), under which the stepping-up order is issued, with the next increment on completion of the required qualifying service from the date of re-fixation.