) in the CCL and Rs. 15600-39100 plus Grade Pay Rs. 6600/- (pre revised Rs. 10,000-325-15200/-) in Central Health Service.

5. The learned Tribunal considered the letter of absorption dated 10th of March, 2010 to hold that she is to be treated as a new entrant and she has to be guided by new pension scheme applicable to the Central Government Employee as are appointed after 1st of January, 2004. It was also observed that her entry in CGHS is a Patna High Court CWJC No.21710 of 2014 dt.28-07-2016 6 /9 lateral entry which jeopardizes the prospect of promotion of direct entrants of doctors in the lower cadres. Consequently, all the three Original Applications were dismissed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Office Memorandum dated 10th of March, 2010 whereby the petitioner was absorbed in the Central Health Service. The relevant conditions reads as under:-

Estt. (RR) dated 03.10.1989 and will also be subject to the orders to be issued by the Government in consultation with the UPSC on the basis of the Supreme Court's judgment of December 1999 in the case between Delhi Police Personnel on deputation Vs. Union of India."

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Clause 11.2 of the Office Memorandum dated 3rd of October, 1989 and pointed out that the said circular has been examined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case between Delhi Police Personnel as referred to in the said circular which judgment has since been reported as Sub- Patna High Court CWJC No.21710 of 2014 dt.28-07-2016 7 /9 Inspector Rooplal and another Vs. Lt. Governor through Chief Secretary, Delhi and others, (2000) 1 SCC 644. The Court was examining circular dated 29.05.1986, which has the similar conditions as are couched in the circular dated 3.10.1989. The Court held that the petitioners therein are entitled to count the service rendered by them in the post of Sub-Inspector in BSF for the purpose of seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspector (Executive) in the Delhi Police interpreting Clause 11.2 of the Circular dated 3rd of October, 1989. The Court held to the following effect:-

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that relying upon the aforesaid judgment; the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the matter of Dr. Snehal Bhave held that the deputationists are to be given seniority taking into full account equivalent service in the parent department. The writ application filed by the Central Government against the order of the Tribunal stands dismissed by Delhi High Court on 22nd of July, 2010. The Delhi High Court concluded as under:-

9. It may be indicated that order of appointment considered in Dr. Snehal Bhave's case has verbatim same language as in the letter of absorption of the petitioner dated 10.03.2010. Such facts were not brought to the notice of the Tribunal. In view of the aforesaid judgments, the petitioner would be entitled to be absorbed from the date she came on deputation on substantive basis with effect from 20th of January, 2003 vide order dated 19th of August, 2003. Consequently, she would be entitled to pay protection from the said date as also seniority in the CGHS. Since her date of appointment is prior 1.1.2004, she would be guided by the old pension scheme as well.

10. The writ applications are allowed in the above terms.