D C BUCH Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Y.N. Oza, learned Senior Advocate with Mr.M.J.Mehta, learned advocate, for the petitioners and Mr. Neeraj Soni learned AGP for the respondent - State Authorities.

(2.) BY way of this petition, it is prayed to direct the respondent authorities to fix the pay of the petitioners in the pay scale of Rs.1200-1800 then prevailing, on the date when they were promoted to the post of District Superintendent of Police ('D.S.P.' for short)or equivalent post. The said prayer clause is elaborated by the petitioners by saying that the State Authorities be directed to fix the pay of the petitioners equivalent to an I.P.S. Officer, from the date of their appointment to the post of D.S.P.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned AGP has contended that none of the petitioners was ever promoted to Indian Police Service cadre and therefore, the pay scale and other perquisites as prayed for in this petition could not have been granted to them and therefore the same was not granted by the Government. Referring to the affidavit in reply on behalf of the State Authorities, it is pointed out that the petitioners were the State cadre police officers, their promotion from the post of Dy.S.P. to D.S.P. entitled them to get the pay scale to which they were promoted. The said pay scale at the relevant time was of Rs.1100-1600. The said pay scale with appropriate pay fixation was granted to them at the relevant time and it is not that while granting promotion to them, they were continued in the pay scale of Dy.S.P. It is pointed that the pay scale of the cadre of Dy.S.P. was Rs.700-1300 and at the time of promotion from the post of Dy.S.P. to D.S.P., they were entitled to pay scale of Rs.1100-1600 and the same was granted. It is pointed out that all State cadre officers can't be given All India Service Officers Cadre. The appointment to I.P.S. cadre is regulated by different rules which prescribe its own eligibility and even the retirement age in case of I.P.S. cadre officers would be different. It is contended that since the petitioners were not appointed as I.P.S. officers, benefits which are otherwise available to an officers of I.P.S. cadre cannot legally be claimed by them and therefore, the petition be dismissed.