BILAL NAZKI, J. ( 1 ) THIS reference arises out of an order of a division Bench of this Court dated 6-1 -2003. While considering WVMP No. 3828 of 2002 in W. P. No. 7520 of 2002, the Court made the reference. It was submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the matter was covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court, dated 20-9-2001, in writ Petition No. 1540 of 2000 and batch. The Division Bench felt that the ma in question in the matter was regarding interpretation of OM. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994 as to whether the Draughtsmen in Grade-III would be automatically placed in grade-II after putting in four years of service or it is independent or there are any other accompanying circumstances like normal eligibility and availability of posts. The division Bench felt that the judgment of the earlier Division Bench had not considered this question, therefore, the Division bench thought it desirable that the matter be heard by a Full Bench. ( 2 ) NOW before coming to the judgment in writ Petition No. 1540 of 2000, facts, which arise in these writ petitions, may be mentioned hereinbelow. ( 3 ) WE are taking facts of Writ Petition no. 10429 of 2000, which arises out of o. A. No. 396 of 1999. The applicant before the Tribunal was appointed as Draughtsman grade-ll in the scale of Rs. 330-560 with effect from 26-5-1981. This scale was raised to Rs. 425-700 by order No. 15-30/88-SEC, dated 19-7-1993. The applicant before the tribunal contended that she became eligible for upgraded scale of pay of Rs. 425-700 with effect from the date of her joining i. e. 26-5-1981. By memorandum No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994, those Draughtsmen who are in the scale of pay of Rs. 425-700 were entitled to a scale of pay of Rs. 550-750 after completion of four years of service as per Sub-Para (c) of Para 2 of the memorandum dated 19-10-1994. She filed the O. A. seeking a declaration that she was entitled for the benefit of hiaher scale of rs. 1600-2660 from 26-5-1985 i. e. four years after she was placed in the scale of pay of rs. 425-700 in terms of O. M. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994. She filed the O. A. seeking a declaration that she was entitled for the benefit of hiaher scale of rs. 1600-2660 from 26-5-1985 i. e. four years after she was placed in the scale of pay of rs. 425-700 in terms of O. M. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994. She based her contentions on the similarity between her and the applicant in O. A. No. 580 of 1997, which had been disposed of by the Tribunal on 2-2-1999. The Tribunal accepted that the contentions raised were same as in o. A. No. 580 of 1997 and the O. A. was allowed. ( 4 ) BEFORE going to O. A. No. 580 of 1997, it will be profitable to have a look of o. M. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994 and the circumstances in which this notification was issued. ( 5 ) THE pay scales of Draughtsmen in various Offices of the Government of India as recommended by Third Pay Commission and accepted by the Government of India are as under: grade Pay scale Pay scale recommended by accepted Third Pay by Govt. Commission i. D/men Gr. lll rs. 330-560/- rs. 260-430/- ii. D/men Gr. ll rs. 425-700/- rs. 330-560/- iii. D/men Gr. l rs. 550/-750a rs. 425-700/- ( 6 ) THE Draugtsmen working in Central public Works Department (CPWD) went in for Arbitration claiming the pay scales recommended by Third Pay Commission. As per the award of the Board of Arbitration, the draughtsmen of CPWD were given the pay scales as recommended by Third Pay commission notionally with effect from 1-1-1973 and actually from 16-11-1978. ( 7 ) IT is contended by the respondents that pandt Civil Wing consequent upon a study, abolished the three-tier system of draughtsmen into two-tier system in 1979. Junior Grade was Rs. 330-560 and Senior grade was Rs. 425-700. Consequent upon the Arbitration in June, 1980, CPWD revised the grades of the Draughtsmen. The orders were made applicable only to the employees of CPWD. The Draughtsmen in other departments of the Government of India raised the matter before the Committee of the National Council (JCM) to revise their pay scales so that they are brought at par with CPWD. Ministry of Finance on 13-3-1984 revised the pay scales of draughtsmen in Offices/departments of the government of India subject to the condition that their recruitment qualifications are similar to those prescribed for Draughtsmen in CPWD. Ministry of Finance on 13-3-1984 revised the pay scales of draughtsmen in Offices/departments of the government of India subject to the condition that their recruitment qualifications are similar to those prescribed for Draughtsmen in CPWD. Accordingly, pay scales of draughtsmen of Civil Wing, Department of telecom were also revised vide orders dated 12-9-1984. Although Draughtsmen working in the Telecom Department did not have the requisite qualifications, they were given higher grades on the basis of their length of service in a particular grade. The benefit of pay revision was given to them notionally with effect from 13-5-1982 and actual benefits were given from 1-11-1983. The draughtsmen were not satisfied and All India p and T Wing Non-Gazetted Employees union filed a case before the Central administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, for granting of pay on par with CPWD with effect from 1-1-1973. Central Administrative tribunal directed the Department to revise the pay scales of Draughtsmen of Civil Wing notionally with effect from 22-8-1973 and actually from 16-11-1978. Department filed special Leave Petition before the Supreme court, which was dismissed. Accordingly, in supersession of the Department s order, dated 12-9-1984, the pay scales of draughtsmen of Civil Wing, Department of telecom were revised on par with CPWD vide orders dated 19-7-1993. Some draughtsmen did not get the benefit of pay revision on the basis of the order dated 13-3-1984 as they did not possess requisite qualifications. They also raised the matter before the JCM and requested that they may be extended the benefit of revised scales irrespective of their recruitment qualifications, and Ministry of Finance vide om. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994 extended the revised scales to Draughtsmen grade-Ill, Grade-ll and Grade-l on completion of seven, five and four years of service respectively irrespective of their recruitment qualifications. ( 8 ) IN the light of these facts, it is not disputed that both sides relied on om. No. 13 (1 )-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994 extended the revised scales to Draughtsmen grade-Ill, Grade-ll and Grade-l on completion of seven, five and four years of service respectively irrespective of their recruitment qualifications. ( 8 ) IN the light of these facts, it is not disputed that both sides relied on om. No. 13 (1 )-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994. This o. M. gives a reference to the Department s o. M issued on 13-3-1984 and then states that a Committee of the National Council was set up to consider the request of the staff side that the scales of pay allowed to the Draughtsmen Grade-l, II and III working in CPWD on the basis of the award of Board of Arbitration, may be extended to draughtsmen Grade-l, II and III respectively irrespective of their recruitment qualifications in all the Government of India Offices. Then it prescribes the revised scales of the three grades and thereafter O. M. states that the president is now pleased to decide that the draughtsmen Grade-l, II and III in Offices/ departments of the Government of India other than in CPWD may also be placed in the scales of pay mentioned above subject to the following:" (A) Minimum period of service for placement from the post carrying scale of Rs. 975-1540 to Rs. 1200-2040 (pre-revised Rs. 260-430 to Rs. 330-560)- 7 years (b) Minimum period of service for placement from the post carrying scale of Rs. 1200-2040 to Rs. 1400-2300 (pre-revised Rs. 330-560 to Rs. 425-700) - 5 years (c) Minimum period of service for placement from the post carrying scale of Rs. 1400-2300 to Rs. 1600-2660 (pre-revised Rs. 425-700 to Rs. 550-750)- 4 years once the Draughtsmen are placed in the regular scales, further promotions would be made against available vacancies in higher grade and in accordance with the normal eligibility criteria laid down in the recruitment rules. The benefit of this revision of scales of pay would be given w. e. f. 13-5-1982 notionally and actually from 1-11-1983. " ( 9 ) NOW, in the light of this O. M, a look of the judgment of the Tribunal in O. A. No. 580 of 1997 will be profitable. This O. A. was decided on altogether diffrent considerations. The benefit of this revision of scales of pay would be given w. e. f. 13-5-1982 notionally and actually from 1-11-1983. " ( 9 ) NOW, in the light of this O. M, a look of the judgment of the Tribunal in O. A. No. 580 of 1997 will be profitable. This O. A. was decided on altogether diffrent considerations. The grievance of the petitioner in that O. A. was that his pay was fixed by an Office order dated 6-2-1996 in terms of O. M. No. 13 (1 )-IC/91, dt. 19-10-1994 and the applicant had not been paid accordingly. But, a letter was issued on 19-2-1997 reviewing the earlier orders and he was asked to remit back the excess salary drawn by him. Therefore, the case was altogether on different fact situation. ( 10 ) NOW coming to the judgment in Writ petition No. 1540 of 2000, the question of interpretation of O. M. No. 13 (1)-IC/91, dated 19-10-1994 did not come before the earlier division Bench and the reference is also confined only to the interpretation to be placed on the O. M. ( 11 ) WE have quoted hereinabove the main features of the O. M. It does not contemplate automatic placing of people in higher grade after completion of minimum service as prescribed in Clause-2 (a) to (c ). On the other hand, Clause-3 of the O. M. states that once the Draughtsmen are placed in the regular scales further promotions would be made against available vacancies in higher grade and in accordance with the normal eligibility criteria laid down in the recruitment rules. So, a person who is placed by virtue of this order in a grade of rs. 1200-2040 after completion of service of seven years, he cannot automatically go to the grade of Rs. 1400-2300 on completion of five years of service. Similarly, a person who is placed in a grade of Rs. 1400-2300 will not go to the grade of Rs. 1600-2660 automatically after completion of four years of service. Because, the experience of seven years, five years and four years is a prerequisite for consideration for promotion to the higher grade, which has to be done in accordance with the eligibility criteria and on the basis of available vacancies. 1400-2300 will not go to the grade of Rs. 1600-2660 automatically after completion of four years of service. Because, the experience of seven years, five years and four years is a prerequisite for consideration for promotion to the higher grade, which has to be done in accordance with the eligibility criteria and on the basis of available vacancies. ( 12 ) LET us assume there are many persons who have put in service of seven years in the grade of Rs. 1200-2040. They become eligible for being considered to be promoted to the grade of Rs. 1400-2300. But, if there are no posts available with the department in that scale, they cannot have an automatic walkover on completion of the requisite service. Placement of these persons in three different grades in consequence of the O. M. was a one-time exercise. After this exercise was completed, for going to a higher grade from a lower grade, the conditions laid down in the O. M. had to be satisfied and two conditions are laid down in the O. M. The first condition being the recruitment criteria and the second is availability of posts. ( 13 ) EVEN the Division Bench of Madras high Court in Union of India rep. by the chairman, Telecom Commission, department of Telecommunications, New delhi and another v. R. Jothimani and another^, at para 10 of the Judgment held that:"again, even if the office memorandum dated 19-10-1994 was to be wholly relied upon, we must hasten to point out that even there, in paragraph 3 it is specifically provided that once the daughtsmen are placed in the regular pay scale, further promotions would be made against the available vacancies in the higher grade. It is obvious that these available vacancies in the higher grade would be obviously in terms of the recruitment rules. In this behalf, mr. Udhayakumar, produced before us the amended rules under Art. 309 by which the three grades of Draughtsmen were created. There also in the schedule we find that out of the total number of posts, 900 posts are reserved for the Grade-Ill draughtsmen, 450 are meant for grade-ll Draughtsmen and only 150 are earmarked for Grade-I draughtsmen, this is in keeping with the ratio of 60:30:10 provided by the office Memorandum dated 23-8-1993. There also in the schedule we find that out of the total number of posts, 900 posts are reserved for the Grade-Ill draughtsmen, 450 are meant for grade-ll Draughtsmen and only 150 are earmarked for Grade-I draughtsmen, this is in keeping with the ratio of 60:30:10 provided by the office Memorandum dated 23-8-1993. Unfortunately, even these rules, for the reasons best known, were not placed before the Tribunal nor did the Tribunal insist upon their production. Once the rules become available, obviously, the office Memorandum Dated 19-10-1994 and more particularly, paragraph 3, which makes a clear-cut reference to the words "available vacancies" will have to be read in the proper spirit. In paragraph 3, there is a clear-cut reference made to the recruitment rules. At least, that should have put the tribunal on guard. Unfortunately, it seems that the rules were not placed before the learned Members. Be that as it may, since there is a specific recruitment rules available providing for the ratio amongst the three grades of draughtsmen and once a specific reply has been given by the Government suggesting that though the first respondent had put in four years of minimum service in Grade II, there was no post available in Grade-I as per the ratio fixed, that should have ordinarily been the end of the matter. The first respondent did not in any manner show that actually the posts were available in grade-l and that in spite of such availability, his claim was not accepted which was made by making a specific representation. We , therefore, are unable to agree with the Tribunal and more particularly its reasoning that since there is no ratio provided in the office Memorandum dated 19-10-1994 therefore, the first respondent automatically became entitled to be fixed in the higher grade or to be taken to the grade-l Draughtsmen post on the completion of his four years of service. According to us, even if the first respondent became entitled by reason of his continuous service of four years in Grade-II yet he could be entitled to the higher emoluments or the higher pay scale only if the post was available in Grade-l in terms with the ratio provided for by the rules and more particularly by office memorandum dated 23-8-1993. That being the case, we must hold that the Tribunal was in error in taking the view that it did, we accordingly set aside the order of the tribunal and order the dismissal of the original application. The writ petition is allowed. However, there shall be no orders as to the costs. W. P. M. P. No. 869 of 2000 is closed. " ( 14 ) ACCORDINGLY, the reference is answered. The matter be placed before the division Bench.