IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 8818 of 2006 Between: Raghuveer Prasad S/o. Late Ram Bhorosi R/o.CISF Type-3, Quarter No.21/5 CISF Complex, N.F.C., Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force Ministry of Home Affairs, C.G.O. complex, Lodhi road, New Delhi 2 The Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force South West Section, Chembur, Mumbia, Maharastra state 3 The Senior Commandant, CISF Unit, Central Industrial Security Force, Ministry of Home Affairs, Neuclear Ministry of Home Affairs,Neuclear Fuel complex ECIL Post, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in denying crossing eﬃciency bar beneﬁts of release of increments vide proceedings No.E-270151/36/CISF/No.11/01-3214, dated 7.6.2002 which is conﬁrmed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No.E- 22014/1/E/Ad.IV/SWS/02/9750 dated 2.12.2002 which was communicated through the proceddings No. E- 22014/33/CISF/AFC/AD.II/2002/6424 dated 13.12.2002 of the 3rd respondent vide proceedings letter No.E- 31016/20/2003/Estt.I/1402, dated 19.11.2003 which is communicated vide proceedings No.E/22014/CISF/NFC/AD.II/2003/5300 dated 10.12.2003 of the 3rd respondent is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release all the with held increments for the years 1988,1989 to 1990 duly ﬁxing the pay of the petitiner and release all consequently benefits forthwith to the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.M.NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8818 of 2006 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the third respondent dated 7.6.2002 in denying the beneﬁt of ‘crossing eﬃciency bar’ for release of increments, as conﬁrmed by the second respondent vide proceedings dated 2.12.2002 and further conﬁrmed by the ﬁrst respondent vide proceedings dated 19.11.2003 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It appears, petitioner who was working as Head Constable in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), was denied increments for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990 on the ground that he has not crossed eﬃciency bar test. However, he was found crossed ‘eﬃciency bar’ with eﬀect from 1.7.1991 and his increments were released from the year 1991. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that since he was declared to have crossed the eﬃciency bar test with eﬀect from 1.7.1991, he is entitled for increments during the period he was denied i.e. for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990. There is no necessity of going into all the details. The respondents ﬁled a detailed counter. A t para 6 of the said counter, it is categorically stated that the petitioner has submitted a representation on 26.4.2002 at a very belated stage i.e. after completion of about 10 years from the date of allowing to cross the Eﬃciency Bar (EB) stage, requesting to release his withheld increments for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990 along with the increment for the year 1991 by reviewing his EB-DPC in terms of CISF Headquarters, New Delhi letter No.E- 27099/109/92/Entt/231 dated 2.4.1992. Accordingly, the matter was taken up with the Commandant, CISF Unit, OCS, Delhi in order to conﬁrm the fact whether the Board recommended to ﬁx the pay of the individual at a higher stage taking into account the length of service from due date of crossing the EB and referred to the next higher authority for ﬁnal decision in accordance with paras 8.9 and 8.10 of CISF Establishment manual vide this oﬃce letter No.2600 dated 10.5.2002. In reply, the Commandant, CISF Unit, O C S , Sakurbasthi vide their letter No.E- 36017/CISF/OCS/DOC/EB/2002/2655 dated 23.5.2002 has intimated that in the case of above named HC/GD, no special recommendation has been endorsed by the DPC Board, hence question of granting increments for the year 1988, 1989 and 1990 does not arise. The administrative action is in order. The above fact has also been conveyed to the petitioner vide proceedings No.E-27015/36/CISF/NFC/AD.II/01-3214 dated 7.6.2002. Whereas, petitioner has stated that the third respondent has rejected the claim of the petitioner for release of the increments due for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990, which is incorrect. Thus, it is clear that no special recommendation has been endorsed by the DPC Board, therefore, petitioner’s case was not considered for granting increments for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990. It is altogether diﬀerent if the case of the petitioner was recommended and the higher authority rejected the same. This is not one such case. Since the petitioner was declared to have crossed the eﬃciency bar with eﬀect from 1.7.1991, he is entitled for being considered for the purpose of granting increments for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990. Under those circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits, the third respondent is directed to make a special recommendation for the purpose of granting increments for the years 1988,1989 and 1990 and on such recommendation, the competent authority shall pass appropriate orders, as per law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such recommendations and communicate the same to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 18.10.2008 DA THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8818 of 2006 18.10.2008