THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18243 of 2000 Date:28th October, 2011 Between: G.Jeeva Raju S/o.G.Gabrial ….Petitioner and 1.The Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, SCR, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad & Anr. ….Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18243 of 2000 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by G.Jeeva Raju seeking mandamus declaring the action of the Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, SCR, Secunderabad-1st respondent in re- fixing his pay in the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector without giving him an opportunity vide Memorandum No.X/P.481/1/Vol.V, dated 25.02.1999, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Constable on 08.05.1971. He was promoted as Naik on 04.08.1976 and further promoted as Head Constable on 01.03.1980. He came to be empanelled for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector under Force Order No.11/89, dated 10.01.1989. He was regularly promoted to the post of Assistant Sub- Inspector under Force Order No.22/89, dated 17.01.1989. Subsequently, under proceeding, dated 16.10.1990, he was reverted to the post of Head Constable and he was directed to undergo pre- promotional training for a period of 8 weeks. After undergoing training he came to be promoted to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector and thereafter to the post of Sub-Inspector. While implementing the 5th Pay Commission Scale, his pay came to be fixed treating the pre- promotional training period as Head Constable. He submitted representation, dated 20.03.1999. There being no response to his representation, he approached this Court seeking the relief stated supra. 3. Rule Nisi came to be issued on 27.09.2000. 4. The respondents filed counter-affidavit. It is stated in the counter- affidavit that the pay of the petitioner has been fixed as per rules in force. It is further stated that pre-promotional training is mandatory as per Rule 64.2 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987, (for short, ‘the Rules’) and during the training period his substantive post will be taken into consideration for fixing of pay. For better appreciation, I may refer paras. 4 and 5 of the counter-affidavit, which read as hereunder: “With regard to para.2 of the affidavit, it is submitted that the petitioner was promoted as Sr.Rakshak (Naik) w.e.f. 12.01.1976 and not on 04.08.1976 as contended. He was further promoted as Head Rakshak (Head Constable) on 22.03.1980 and not on 01.03.1980 as stated. It is a fact that he was selected by a duly constituted departmental promotional committee and empanelled provisionally as Asst. Sub-Inspector in scale Rs.1320-2040 (RSRP) vide Force Order No.11/89, dated 10.01.1989 of the 1st Respondent and was regularly promoted to officiate as Asst. Sub Inspector in scale Rs.1320-2040 (RSRP) vide Force Order No.22/89, dated 17.01.1989 of 1st Respondent. But it is not correct to say that the petitioner had completed his probation period of two years on 17.01.1991. The petitioner was reverted to his substantive rank of Head Constable before undergoing Asst. Sub-Inspector Pre-Promotion Course, w.e.f. 22.10.1990 vide as per ZSC message No.X/P.673/P&R/Vol.III, dtd:16.10.1990 issued by the 1st Respondent. 5. With regard to para. 3 of the affidavit it is submitted that the petitioner’s pay was fixed in scale Rs.1320-2040 (RSRP), on his promotion as Asst. Sub-Inspector, at Rs.1320/- w.e.f. 19.01.1989 and not on 18.01.1989 as stated. He was granted annual increment in scale Rs.1320-2040 (RSRP) increasing his pay from Rs.1320/- to Rs.1350/- w.e.f. 01.01.1990. Respondent No.2 granted annual increment irregularly increasing his pay from Rs.1350/- to Rs.1380/- w.e.f. 01.01.1991 for which the petitioner was not entitled to in scale Rs.1320-2040 (RSRP) as Asst. Sub-Inspector since he was reverted as Head Constable from 22.10.1990. Respondent No.2 re-fixed his pay at Rs.1380/- w.e.f. 04.10.1991 which he was not entitled to as Asst. Sub-Inspector and as such the Respondent No.2 revised fixation of pay and granted further increment vide Divisional Security Commissioner/Vijayawada Memorandum No.B/XP.483/Bills, dt.28.01.1998.” 5. Heard Sri J.M.Naidu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Gowri Shankar Sanghi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Railways appearing for the respondents. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner underwent training as Assistant Sub-Inspector and scale of pay attached to the Asst. Sub-Inspector was paid during the training period. He would also contend that under Rule 63 of the Rules, the period of training including in-service course shall be treated as duty for all purposes. By referring the above Rule, it is contended by the learned counsel that the period of pre-promotional training undergone by the petitioner is to be treated as trainee Assistant Sub-Inspector and not as Head Constable. In support of his submissions, reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhagwan Shukla v. Union of India & Ors.[1] 7. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for Railways appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner has not challenged the proceedings, dated 16.10.1990, whereunder he along with others was reverted to the substantive rank of Head Constable before being sent for training and therefore, at this distance of time, he cannot be permitted to contend that he underwent training as trainee Asst. Sub- Inspector. 8. I have gone through the material placed on record. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his pay has not been properly fixed in implementing the 5th Pay Commission Scale. He submitted a representation, dated 20.03.1999, ventilating his grievance. No reply has been issued to the petitioner on the said representation. 9. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation, dated 20.03.1999, submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the Rules in force. No costs. ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:28th October, 2011. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.18243 of 2000 Date:28th October, 2011 [1] AIR 1994 S.C. 2480