ANTONY DOMINIC, J. This appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C). No.24247/2006. The writ petition was filed by him mainly challenging Ext.P6 order, where relying on Ext.P7 Board order, his claim for grant of higher grade reckoning his military service was rejected. Ext.P6 having been upheld by the learned Single Judge, this appeal is filed.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3.
3. After rendering military service during the period 22.7.1981 to 30.11.1987, the appellant joined the service of respondents 2 and 3 as Junior Assistant with effect from 10.7.1992. He was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant with effect from 6.6.1994. By Ext.P3 order, he was granted higher grade with effect from 7.6.2004.
4. The claim of the appellant is that reckoning his military service for the period of six years and four months, he should have been granted higher grade with effect from 28.1.1998, when, according to him, including military service, he would have had ten years' service while working in the category of Senior Assistant. It was this claim, which was rejected by Ext.P6, where the respondents have placed reliance on Ext.P7 Board order dated 6.2.1993.
5. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that what he claimed is grant of first higher grade, which is governed by Ext.P4 and that Ext.P7 only governs grant of third higher grade. Therefore, it is contended that Ext.P7 was irrelevant insofar as his claim is concerned and that the respondents erred in negativing his claim.
6. However, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, though Ext.P7 was issued following the claim raised by the employees for third grade promotion, a reading of Ext.P7 shows that it has been issued revising the scheme for grant of higher grades including grades 1, 2 and 3 and this is obvious from clause 5 of Ext.P7 itself. Going by Ext.P7, counting of military service for the higher grade promotion will be limited to the posts in higher grade, which are below the scales of pay equivalent to that of gazetted officers in Government service and that military service will be reckoned only at the entry stage.
7. Insofar as this case is concerned, the entry stage of the appellant is in the post of Junior Assistant, where he joined on 10.7.1992. In this category he got promotion to the category of Senior Assistant with effect from 6.6.1994 and as a result, there was no circumstance for granting him higher grade by reckoning the military service. Going by Ext.P7, if a person like the appellant is to get higher grade in the promoted post of Senior Assistant, the prescribed stagnation for ten years is necessary and for counting such stagnation, one cannot take credit of the military service. It was therefore that, on completion of ten years with effect from 6.6.1994, the appellant was given higher grade with effect from 7.6.2004 by Ext.P3. This does not suffer from any illegality and the view taken by the learned Single Judge does not merit interference. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Sd/-
sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS , JUDGE ///True copy/// P.S. to Judge