W 2. 0/0 Chief General Manager Telecom, Raipur, R/o House no. 130, Tikripara, RDA New Colony, Tikarapara, Raipur. WRITPE'HI‘IONUNDERARIICLEWOF'IHEmNSIIIUHONOFlNDIA. E HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. No. 4263 of 2004 9‘0 Petitioners Union of India & Others Respondents Versus Respondent Bishnu Pada Sanyal Applicant WP. No. 4360 of 2004 Petitioners Union of lndia & Others Respondents Versus N.C. Roy & Others Respondents Applicants W.P. N0.-4455 of 2004 Petitioners Union of india & Others Respondents Versus Smt. Minu Mallick & Others Respondents Applicants W.P. No. 4456 of 2004 ‘ Petitioner‘s Union of India & Others espondents it, Respondents Applicants Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of lndia a Versus ‘S.K. Mukherjee & Others DB: Hon’ble Shri Justice LM. Quddusi 8t, ‘ o’l Shri'ustice N . aal. Present : Shri WS Moorthy, Sr. Advocate with Shri RM Solapurkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri AS DadariYa, Advocate for the respondents. R 1 Hnbe J . K Agrw (Passed on? ORAL 22" \'day ORDER of July, 2010) QB Per I.M. Quddusi, J. By this common order, writ petition Nos. 4263IO4, 4360/04, 4455/04 and 4456/04 are being disposed of 'as the common . facts and issues are involved in ail these writ petitions. These petitions are directed against the Impugned order dated 17.03.2004, passed by the Centrai Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in OA Nos. 898 of 2000 & 278, 329, and 520 of 2001. ‘ 7 ‘The Tribunal has held that the employees of the petitioner’s department who do not have any promotional avenues on the next higher scale are given One Time Bound Promotion (for short l‘O‘TBP’) and Biennial Cadre Review (for short ‘BCR') on their posts on completion of r 16 &' 26 years of services respectively. Since the‘petitioners were not granted next higher scale on completion of 26 years of service to the respondents, v and on the basis of circular they decided to provide BCR scale fromJhe date of assumption of charge, the respondents. approached before the Tribunal and vide impugned order the Tribunal directed that 'BCR scale to the respondents be given from the due date. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have tiled these writ petitions. The Whole object of the scheme to provide OTBP and BCR on completion of 16 years and 26 years of service respectively, is that there are no promotional avenues on the higher posts, and therefore, in our opinion, ’if the benetit ‘of OTBP and BCR _ \ Q schemes are not given from the due date and is given at a later stage, the same would amount to withholding of the benefit provided to them under the rules as rule provides the higher scales on completion of 16 and 26 years of service. Because of the reason that there is no promotional avenues on completion of 16 & 26 years, it does not mean that it would be the pleasure of the, petitioners that at any-time after completion of the specified service they may be considered for- the next higher scale or the same can be awarded even after a long time. The purpose of the rule for providing next higher scalewhere promotions are not available would be frustrated if the same is withheld for certain timeand the same would be amount to denial of the entitlement of getting the next higher scale. There is no question of assumption of charge when the respondents are continuing on the same posts and 'merely getting the next higher scale due to non availability of promotional avenues on completion of 26 years of service. ln view of above discussions, we do not find and manifest error in thejmpugned order passed by the Tribunal andwe affirm the same. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed. Nolorder “as to costs, A copy of this order be placed on record of Writ Petition Nos. i 4360/04, 4455/04 and ,4456/04. Sd/— Sd/- Tg q l I.M.Quddusi 4 ‘1, i N.K.Agarwa1 Judge (r F' ‘, Judge