Judgment :- K.L. Manjunath, J The short question that arises for our consideration in this writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled for fixation of his pay in selection time scale with effect from 21.5.1977. 2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had joined as a police constable on 12.4.1965 and he retired from the service after attaining the age of superannuation on 30th April 1999 as Special Reserve Sub-Inspector. According to him, in the normal course he would have been entitled for selection time scale of pay with effect from 21.5.1977 but the same has not been considered by the respondent and that selection time scale of pay was not given to him. Contending that his case has not been considered, he approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in Application No.2603/2000, which application has been rejected on 18th August 2008. The Tribunal has rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that Rule 9 has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case since he has been given benefit of revised time scale and that he is not entitled for selection time scale of pay as on 1.4.1977, since by then the said benefit had been withdrawn by the Government. Challenging the same, the present petition is filed. 3. We have heard Mr. Nataraj, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Government Advocate for the respondents. 4. The main contention of the petitioner is that the Tribunal has not applied Rule 9 properly and on account of wrong interpretation of Rule 9, the petitioner case has been prejudiced and his relief is not granted. 5. Therefore, what is to be considered by us, in this writ petition is that whether he is entitled for fixation of pay in selection time scale with effect from 21.5.1977. 6. It is not in dispute that Rule 9 can be applied to a person whose scale of pay has not been fixed based on the revised pay scale. When once revision of pay scale has been granted to a person, in such an event, Rule 9 cannot be made applicable. Since, it is not the case of the appellant, revision of pay scale has not been given, we cannot consider the grievance of the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the petition is rejected.