JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal seeks to challenge order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.09.2008, whereby writ petition filed by petitioner (appellant herein) was dismissed. 2. Appellant in the writ petition prayed for a relief that his service for the purpose of grant of second selection scale on completion of 18 years of service should be counted from the date of his initial appointment in previous department i.e. the department of sheep and wool, where he was appointed by open selection as stock assistant vide order dated 08.07.1987. Subsequently, appellant, in response to advertisement issued by revenue department, applied for and was appointed on the post of 'survey amin' by direct recruitment in office of settlement Commissioner vide order dated 24.06.1992. He felt aggrieved because his period of service of five years in previous department was excluded. Since it was not counted towards grant of selection scales on completion 18 years of service in terms of Government circular dated 25.01.1992, this delayed his second selection scale and first selection scale was withdrawn. 3. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Petitioner thereafter filed review petition before learned Single Judge relying this time on a Government order dated 03.05.1997, whereby existing "fourth" proviso to Para 3 of order dated 25.01.1992 was substituted by the following: "Provided further that in case of an employee who has been transferred from one department to another department or from one appointing authority to another authority within the same department in public interest or at his own request or while serving in one department of the State Government is recruited directly in other department on the same post the service of nine, eighteen or twenty seven years, as the case may be, shall be counted for the purpose of grant of selection grade from the date of initial appointment on the same post in accordance with the provisions contained in the relevant recruitment rules. As a result of counting of service rendered in previous department under previous appointing authority for grant of selection grade, if the pay of a junior Government servant becomes more than the pay of his senior, no stepping up of pay of senior Government servant shall be permissible." 4. As a result of counting of service rendered in previous department under previous appointing authority for grant of selection grade, if the pay of a junior Government servant becomes more than the pay of his senior, no stepping up of pay of senior Government servant shall be permissible." 4. The aforesaid order also indicated that the order dated 03.05.1997 shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from 25.01.1992; in other words, it would be as if the 4th proviso was contained in the originally issued circular dated 25.01.1992. 5. This circular was produced before the Single Bench with the writ petition. When however review of the judgment was sought on the basis of this amendment circular dated 03.05.1997, learned Single Judge has refused to examine aforesaid order holding that writ petition itself was decided after examining material on record taking note of Rule 208(b) of the RSR and there is no justification to review the order impugned herein. 6. The bone of contention between the parties now before the division bench is as to what would be the meaning of word 'the same post', referred to in 4th proviso inserted by aforesaid order dated 03.05.1997. The aforesaid proviso ordains that in case of an employee who has been transferred from one department to another department or from one appointing authority to another authority within the same department in public interest or at his own request or while serving in one department of the State Government is recruited directly in other department on the same post the service of nine, eighteen or twenty seven years, as the case may be, shall be counted for the purpose of grant of selection grade from the date of initial appointment on the same post in accordance with the provisions contained in the relevant recruitment rules. 7. Shri Rajdeepak Rastogi, learned counsel for appellant, has argued that word 'the same post' in 4th proviso, would refer to pay scale and not nomenclature of the post; in other words, what he seeks to canvass that the post in new department and previous department should carry same pay scale although its nomenclature may be different, which, in different departments, is bound to differ. 8. 8. Shri Amit Oja and Shri Vikrant Yadav, learned counsel for respondents, opposed the appeal and submitted that not only the pay scale should be same but also the post should carry same nomenclature, although the cadre may be different. 9. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival submission and perused material on record. 10. In our considered view, circular of the Government dated 25.01.1992 was issued with a view to removing stagnation in the career of members of subordinate service, who are not able to secure even a single promotion during span of nine years of service. Therefore the scheme of upgrading their pay scales respectively on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service was formulated and it is in that light that subsequent amendment circular dated 03.05.1997 has to be viewed. We have to therefore make purposive as well as contextual interpretation of the words "the same post" in the scheme of things. Words 'the same post' are therefore to be construed to mean a post which carries the same pay scale because that is the purpose for grant of selection scales on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service. In case the period of initial service of 5 years rendered by appellant in sheep and wool department is not counted for the purpose of grant of first, second and third selection scales on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service, then every selection scale of the appellant would be delayed by five years. In order to obviate this situation for the Government servants, the Government has introduced the amendment and thereby substituted original 4th proviso by afore-quoted proviso that if an employee, who, while serving in one department of the state Government is recruited directly in another department on the same post, the service rendered by him in previous department shall be counted for grant of selection scales on completion of of 9, 18 and 27 years of service, as the came may be. The effect of this would be that period of service from 14th July, 1987, the date of initial appointment of appellant as stock assistant in the department of sheep and wool till the date of his joining in the office of settlement Commissioner on the post of survey amin vide order dated 23.07.1992, would be liable to be counted for the purpose of grant of every selection scale on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service. 11. We, therefore, accordingly allow the writ petition as also this special appeal. Consequences to follow. Compliance be made within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before the respondents. This also disposes of the stay application.Appeal and writ Petition Allowed. *******