JUDGMENT 1. (Oral) - This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers "(1) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the denial of selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 may kindly be declared to be illegal and the same may be quashed and set-aside, (2) by a further appropriate writ, order or direction para 3 of Finance Department's order dated 25.1.1992 may also kindly be declared to be illegal and arbitrary and the same may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may be directed to pay selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 to the petitioners from the date they became eligible for the same with arrears throughout and interest at the rate of 18% per annum; (iii) any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioners; (iv) costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioners." 2. Brief facts are that petitioners were initially appointed on the post of L.D.C. On completion of nine years of service, they were granted benefit of first selection scale. Since they were not granted promotion even before completion of 18 years of service, second selection scale was granted to them vide Annexure 8. The petitioners were fixed in the pay scale of 1400-2600. On completion of 27 years of service, they became entitled for third selection scale in view of the Circular dated 25.1.1992 (Annexure 9). Before completion of 27 years of service, petitioners were granted promotion to the post of Assistant Tourist Officer carrying lower pay scale then petitioners were getting after benefit of second selection scale. They were denied benefit of third selection scale in view of one promotion. The persons junior to the petitioners appointed on the post of L.D.C. were also given benefit of first and second selection scale. They were, however, not promoted to the post of Assistant Tourist Officer for want of educational qualification. On completion of 27 years of service, junior employees were given benefit of third selection and accordingly they started drawing pay in the higher pay scale. The petitioners, though seniors and better qualified were denied benefit of third selection scale thereby getting lower pay scale while working on higher post then of their juniors. 3. On completion of 27 years of service, junior employees were given benefit of third selection and accordingly they started drawing pay in the higher pay scale. The petitioners, though seniors and better qualified were denied benefit of third selection scale thereby getting lower pay scale while working on higher post then of their juniors. 3. The petitioners have two fold claim to make pursuant to the circular dated 25.1.1992. First claim is for grant of benefit of third selection scale pursuant to Para 2(iii), as petitioners were not given benefit of three promotions. In the alternative, it is prayed that pursuant to para 3, petitioners are entitled for grant of benefit of first selection scale after nine years of their promotion on the post of Assistant Tourist Officer. 4. The respondents have denied the benefit either ways, thus petitioners approached this Court after rejection of their representation. 5. The respondents on the other hand submits that as per the Circular dated 25.1.1992, petitioners are not entitled for the benefit of third selection scale having been promoted before completion of 27 years of service. They are not entitled even the selection scale after a period of nine years from the date of promotion as per para 3 of the circular. The object behind issuance of Circular dated 25.1.1992 is to extend benefit of selection scale to those employees who do not get three promotions during their service career. This is to remove stagnation in service. If one has already been granted benefit of first and second selection scale, the condition of grant of first promotion or second promotion is treated to be satisfied. If they are not granted promotion thereafter, one can claim benefit of third selection scale but a person having been promoted before completion of 27 years of service is not entitled for benefit of third selection scale. So far as para 3 of the Circular of 1992 Is concerned, it does not give a further right of selection scale after having exhausted the benefit as given in Para 2. If the Interpretation taken by the petitioners Is accepted then there may be situation where an employee can claim more than three selection scales. For example, If the case in hand Is taken note of, petitioners have been granted benefit of first and second selection scale followed by promotion before third selection scale became due. If the Interpretation taken by the petitioners Is accepted then there may be situation where an employee can claim more than three selection scales. For example, If the case in hand Is taken note of, petitioners have been granted benefit of first and second selection scale followed by promotion before third selection scale became due. If the date of promotion is reckoned to grant of further benefit of selection scale, they would be getting again first, second and third selection scale (depending on length of service) which would be more than three selection scales in their service career. The object of the circular dated 25.1.1992 is not so. Accordingly, there is no error in the action of the respondents. 6. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 7. Main thrust of the argument of both the parties is Circular dated 25.1.2002, hence I looked into the circular. If opening wards of the circular are looked into, the object for giving benefit of three selection scales is to remove stagnation in service career. Taking not of the aforesaid object, benefit of first, second and third selection scales are in lieu of promotions. If an employee is given three promotions, then he is not entitled for benefit of selection scale. Same way in absence of first, second and third promotion, one is entitled for benefit of first, second and third selection scale as given in para 2. Either way, if one gets three promotions or selection scale, the condition is satisfied as given in para (2) and employee is not entitled for further innings of selection scale. 8. Now comes the implication of Para 2 of circular. It would be gainful to quote aforesaid para for ready reference, which Is quoted thus "2(i) The first selection Grade shall be granted from the date following the day on which one completes service of nine years, provided that the employee has not got one promotion earlier as is available in his existing cadre. (ii) the second Selection Grade shall be granted from the day following the day on which one completes service of eighteen years provide that the employee has not got two promotions earlier as might be available in his existing cadre and the first Selection Grade granted to him was lower than the pay scale of Rs. (ii) the second Selection Grade shall be granted from the day following the day on which one completes service of eighteen years provide that the employee has not got two promotions earlier as might be available in his existing cadre and the first Selection Grade granted to him was lower than the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000." (iii) The third selection Grade shall be granted from the day following the day on which one completes service of twenty seven years, provided that the employee has not got three promotions earlier as might be available in his existing cadre and the first or the second selection Grade granted to him, as the case may be, was lower than the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000." 9. Perusal of the para shows that if one is not granted benefit of three promotions then entitled for third selection scale. 10. In the case in hand, petitioners have already been given benefit of two selection scales and thereafter a promotion. According to the respondents, condition of Circular dated 25.1.1992, stands satisfied. I, however, find that the interpretation taken by the respondents is not correct and proper. In fact benefit of sub-para (ii) and (iii) of para 2 applies to the cases where one has not been extended two and three promotions as the case may be. If one has not been given benefit of two promotions, he Is entitled for second selection scale and in the same way if one has not been given three promotions, entitled for third selection scale. 11. In the present matter, petitioners have been given one promotion and otherwise first selection scale, thus condition of para 2(i) stands satisfied. So far as sub-para (ii) of Para 2 is concerned, petitioners have not been given two promotions, thus provided benefit of second selection scale, hence condition of sub-para (ii) stands satisfied. 12. Now comes the real question about the applicability of sub-para (iii) of para 2. The petitioners have not been given three promotions. Thus, they are definitely entitled for the benefit of III Selection scale. This is more so, when on award of benefit of first promotion, promotional post was carrying lesser pay scale then awarded to the petitioners on grant of second selection scale. The petitioners have not been given three promotions. Thus, they are definitely entitled for the benefit of III Selection scale. This is more so, when on award of benefit of first promotion, promotional post was carrying lesser pay scale then awarded to the petitioners on grant of second selection scale. The person junior to the petitioners and even ineligible to get first promotion started drawing more pay scale even after remaining on the lower post because they were made entitled for the benefit of third selection scale carrying higher pay scale. The petitioners can not be denied benefit of third selection scale by virtue of one promotion, that too at the later stage i.e. after award of benefit of first and second selection scale. In fact first promotion only satisfy benefit of first selection scale, which was given to the petitioners earlier to their promotion on account of completion of nine years of service. The petitioners remain entitled for second and third selection if not given two or three promotions. The question further comes as to whether petitioners can be put to disadvantageous position on account of their higher qualification making them entitled for promotion. I am of the considered opinion that it is only on account of mis-interpretation of the circular that petitioners have been denied benefits of third selection scale. 13. So far as the applicability of para 3 is concerned, I am not inclined to accept the argument raised by the counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners having been promoted, could not get a new entitlement for seeking benefits of selection scale afresh, more so, when petitioners have been held entitled for the benefit of third selection scale from the date, they became entitled for it. 14. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for grant of benefit of third selection scale and if there is no adversity in their service record of the relevant period, appropriate benefit of third selection scale may be given. 15. Cost of the writ petition is made easy.Writ Petition Disposed of with Direction as Above. *******