IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.872 of 2001 ANUP SINGH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 29.08.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioners were appointed as direct recruits on the post of Havildar in BMP 16 as ex-serviceman of whom the unit consists alone. It is their case that those who were appointed as Constable at the same time whether ex-serviceman or not were so appointed in the scale of Rs. 425-605/- when the petitioners were appointed in the scale of Rs. 480- 680/-. Consequent to the fourth pay revision the petitioners were now paid in the scale of Rs. 975-1540/- while those appointed as Constables were paid in the scale of Rs.950-1400/- In pursuance of grant of selection grade to such Constables in the year 1988 they were paid in the scale of Rs. 950-1500/- when their basic pay has been fixed at Rs. 1150 while the basic pay of the petitioners remained a Rs. 1050/-. The anomaly persisted in the fifth pay revision also. When the petitioners have represented against the same it has been rejected by the impugned order dated 25.2.1997 simpliciter stating that the discrepancy between the pay scale of those appointed directly and promotees was bound to be there. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the government instruction from time to time more particularly most recent one being dated 31.7.2000 of the Department of Finance bearing letter no. 5292 F (2)/Patna providing for pay protection in such situation to persons like the petitioners has not been considered at all and no reasons have been assigned while rejecting the representation of the petitioners. That it was not a correct position in law to state that the discrepancy in the pay scale leading to grant of lesser pay to the petitioner was a natural outcome without making any endeavour to grant pay protection to the petitioners under the government instructions. The writ application is therefore disposed with directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of pay protection so that they are not granted pay scale lower than their junio9r in accordance with government instructions and pass appropriate orders thereupon in accordance with law within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the respondents propose to pass an order prejudicial to the petitioners they shall be required to pass a reasoned and speaking order spelling out the grounds for which the petitioners are not entitled to the pay protection and the necessary government circular in that regard debarring the persons like the petitioners. In the event that there be substance in the claim of the petitioner it is expected that actual monetary benefits of the same shall be made available to the petitioner within a maximum period of two months from the date of such determination without having requirement for them to approach this Court again. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)