IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34098 of 2003(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. M.R.SURESH BABU, A.R.HC.4089, DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE, KANNUR 2. PRADEEP KUMAR K.V., A.R. HC 4077, DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE, KANNUR. 3. PURUSHOTHAMAN.P.P., A.R.HC.4026, DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE, KANNUR 4. PRADEEP KUMAR. K., A.R.HC. 4054, DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE, KANNUR BY ADV. SMT.DAISY THAMPI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 34098/2003-H APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF G.O.(P).3000/98 FIN DATED 25/11/1998. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 09/12/2002. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE G.O.NO.234/99 HOME DATED 24/11/99. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23/01/2003. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/05/2003. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.34098 OF 2003 ( H) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners joined the service as Police Constables in Armed Police. They earned promotion as Havildars. Subsequently, on the request made by the petitioners, they were transferred to Armed Reserve, where they were later promoted as Head Constable. The claim of the petitioners is that while reckoning their eligibility for the 2nd time bound higher grade, their service from the date of promotion as Havildars in the Armed Police, should also be reckoned. This claim was made and was rejected by Ext.P5. It is challenging Ext.P5 that this writ petition is filed. 2. Counsel for the petitioner relied on Ext.P3 Government Order dated 24.11.99 which provides that the service rendered by persons like the petitioners in Armed Battalion or Armed Reserve, will together be reckoned for awarding first time bound higher grade. It is stated that if so they should get the credit of services in the Armed Police even if they are transferred to Armed Reserve, for awarding the 2nd time bound higher grade. WPC.No.34098 /03 :2 : 3. Paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents reads as under. “Even though the promotion posts of Havildar in KAP 4th Battalion and Head Constables in Armed Reserve, Kannur are identical in pay scales and nature of duty, they were transferred to Armed Reserve at their request only. In the transfer order itself it was clearly mentioned that they will be reverted as Police Constable, if no vacancy is available in the Armed Reserve for absorbing them in the rank held in the Battalion. But as there was no vacancy of Head Constables in Armed Reserve, Kannur at that time they were reverted as Police Constables and their chance to continue in the post of Havildar/Head Constable was lost. As per the option submitted by the petitioners, they have no right to claim the promoted period to count for second time bound grade. Now all the petitioners were given the benefit of II nd time bound Higher Grade after completion of 8 years service in the promoted post from the Armed WPC.No.34098 /03 :3 : Reserve.” 4. From this it is evident that at the time when they opted for transfer to Armed Reserve petitioners agreed to forgo their promotion in the Armed Battalion, if no vacancy was avaklable to accommodate them. As no vacancy was available in the Armed Reserve for absorbing them in the rank they held in the Battalion, they were recruited and absorbed as Police Constables. If so, their eligibility for the second time higher grade can only be reckoned from the date they earned promotion as Head Constables in the Armed Reserve. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners referred me to G.O (P)1041/79(142) fin. dated 27.11.79 and contended that even in respect of inter district transferees, on their absorption as junior most in the transferred District, the period spent by them before transfer is reckoned for time bound higher grade. However, such cases do not involve any reversion as in this case and if so the case of the petitioner cannot be compared to the case dealt with in the Government Order dated 7.11.2078 relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner. WPC.No.34098 /03 :4 : 6. Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the Government Order dated 28.11.81 which according to her provides reckoning of service rendered in different posts having identical time scales of pay for eligibility for reckoning time bound higher grade. The scale of pay of Havildar or Head Constable cannot be identical as that of Police Constable and in that view of the matter the benefit of this Government Order cannot be granted. Further, grant of time bound higher grade can be only as per the terms of the order providing for the same. Petitioners have no case that the order providing for the benefits claimed by them. 7. Therefore I am not satisfied that the petitioners have made out a case for interference. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No.34098 /03 :5 :