R K SAVAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are Police Constables appointed in the Armed Police Battalion as trainees on 1-8-1974. After training, they were regularly appointed as Police Constables with effect from 1-6-1975. Thereafter, they were promoted as Havildars on 20-4-1981. Later on, at their request, they were transferred to the District Armed Reserve as Constables on 7-6-1982. In the District Armed Reserve, the petitioners were promoted as Head Constables on 8-6-1982 by Ext. P1 order. On completion of 10 years in the cadre of Head Constable, they were given higher grade on 19-4-1991. Thereafter, on their request, by Ext. P8 order, they were transferred to the local police. As per the rules, when persons are transferred to the local police from the Armed Reserve Police, they would be reverted as Police Constables. Accordingly, they joined the local police as Constables on 9-1-1992. However, at that time the pay they were drawing were protected although in the lower scale of pay applicable to Police Constables. In November, 1993, this protection was cancelled and their pay was re-fixed in the scale of pay of Police Constable without taking into account the pay they were drawing in the Armed Reserve Police. The higher grade granted to them was also cancelled and the excess amounts paid to them on account of the above were recovered. Thereafter, by Ext. P9 order, the petitioners were granted higher grade. Later, by Ext. P9 order, they were granted 10 year higher grade as Police Constables with effect from 1-6-1995 excluding the period of service put in as Head Constables in the Armed Police Battalion and District Armed Reserve Police. The petitioners' representation against this was answered by Ext. P11, by which it was clarified that although taking into account the period of service put in as Head Constables, they are eligible for 20 years' higher grade, for the purpose of granting higher grade as Police Constables they are not entitled to count their service put in as Head Constables. The petitioners again filed representation pointing out Ext. P4 order by which pursuant to a judgment of this Court in O.P.No. 5481/1990, it was clarified that the benefit of time bound higher grade would be extended to those who are promoted for short spell, but reverted to lower post for want of vacancies and are continuing in the lower post also. It was further clarified that in such cases, their service in the higher post would also be reckoned for computing the prescribed qualifying service in the lower post provided they are eligible for time bound high grade promotion as per the existing rules relating to time bound higher grade scheme. Since their representation did not meet with success, the petitioners filed O.P.No. 20457/1997 before this Court in which the Director General of Police was directed to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of Ext. P4 order. However, by Ext. P15 order, again the claim of the petitioners was rejected holding that as per the existing rules, the period spent in the higher rank will be excluded for granting first 10 year higher grade to a Police Constable who is transferred to local police on reversion as Police Constable. But, the benefit of Ext. P4 order was stated to be not available to the petitioners on the ground that they were not reverted to local police for want of vacancies. The petitioners would contend that since, on account of their subsequent reversion and recovery of excess amount received in the cadre of Head Constable, they must be deemed to have continued all along as Police Constables and that being so, it would be totally unjust to deny them the benefit of 10 year higher grade treating their period of service as Head Constable as service put in as Police Constable. Therefore, in this original petition they are challenging Exts. P12, P13 and P15.

(2.) Learned Government Pleader on the strength of the counter affidavit filed, would submit that the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of Ext. P4 since they were reverted from the post of Head Constable to Police Constable not for want of vacancy which alone would make them eligible for the benefit of Ext. P4. He would submit that Ext. P4 order is not applicable to the petitioners and they are not entitled to reckon their period put in as Head Constables for the purpose of grant of 10 year higher grade promotion in the cadre of Police Constables.

(3.) I have considered the rival contentions in detail.