JUDGMENT 1. - Although the writ petition was originally filed in the year 1997 with the prayer that the respondents be directed to promote the petitioner on the post of Patwari in the year 1984 because other identically situated persons were promoted and be further directed to provide him minimum of the pay scale of Patwari since 1968 to 1984 and grant him benefit of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service, but, the learned counsel for the petitioner has in the course of arguments submitted that he would confine his prayer only to the extent of a direction being given to the respondents to pay pension and other retiral benefits and benefit of increments for the period from 25.9.1992 to 25.9.2000 and revision of pay as per the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission under the Revised Pay Scale Rules of 1996 with effect from 1.9.1996. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 6,900/- and as per that pay, he should have been paid its ⅓rd i.e. 2300 + D.A.(43%) i.e. Rs. 898/- and thus the total pension payable to the petitioner should be Rs. 3389/-, but he was being paid only a sum of Rs. 2,130/- as pension since the date of his retirement. 2. Shri P.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was declared semi permanent as Patwari by order dated 16.10.1969, yet he has not been provided second selection scale on completion of 18 years and third selection scale which become due to be paid on completion of 27 years of service. 3. Shri Hemant Mathur, the learned Deputy Government Counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that additional facts were stated in the rejoinder which was filed much after the filing of the writ petition and reply thereto. He therefore submitted that matter be deferred to enable him to verify the facts. It is submitted that the petitioner was entitled to only two selection scale because, he will be entitled to get the benefit of selection scale form the date he was made permanent on completion of 10 years and was brought in the regular establishment. An order in this respect was passed by the Executive Engineer, Bharatpur on 14.8.1991. It is submitted that the petitioner was entitled to only two selection scale because, he will be entitled to get the benefit of selection scale form the date he was made permanent on completion of 10 years and was brought in the regular establishment. An order in this respect was passed by the Executive Engineer, Bharatpur on 14.8.1991. The learned counsel submitted that the benefit of promotion could not be given to the petitioner because prior to his termination he was working on the post of Amin. When the award was passed by the labour court, he was reinstated on the post of Amin. The promotion of some persons on the post of Patwari, of which reference has been given by the petitioner, none of them were juniors to him. The pension of the petitioner has been calculated as per the Rules. 4. The petitioner has categorically in the writ petition averred the fact that he was declared semi permanent vide order dated 12.2.1979 with effect from 16.10.1969. This averment was made in para 3 of the writ petition, which has been admitted by the respondents. 5. The Government has issued the Circular No.P.1(3)Finance/Expenditure-3/93 dated 4.3.1998 and Circular No.P.1(3) Finance/Expenditure/3/98 dated 30.9.1998 by which guidelines have been provided for grant of benefit of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service in respect of the work charged employees. It has been provided in those Circulars that such period shall be calculated from the date the employee was declared semi permanent. If the period of service of petitioner is calculated form 16.10.1969 when he was declared semi permanent, he would be entitled to third selection scale as well as in fact his first and second selection scale would also be accordingly liable to be recalculated. Moreover, in rejoinder to the reply, which was filed by the petitioner on 25.3.2009, he categorically averred that he has not been granted annual grade increments for the period from 25.9.1992 to 25.9.2000 and also his pay has not been revised as per the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1996 with effect from 1.9.1996, for which reason, he is getting less amount as pension. This grievance of the petitioner also needs to be remedied. 6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. This grievance of the petitioner also needs to be remedied. 6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant selection scale to the petitioner on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service, as the case may be, calculating such period with effect from 16.10.1969 when he was declared semi permanent and also grant him benefit of annual grade increments and revise his pay as per the Revised Pay Scale Rules issued from time to time including the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1996, which became effective from 1.9.1996 and retiral dues of the petitioner shall be liable to be revised accordingly and all the arrears be paid to the petitioner together with interest @ 6% per annum. 7. Compliance of the judgement be made within a period of three months from the date its copy is produced before the respondents.Writ Petition Allowed. *******