JUDGMENT

H.L. Gokhale, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals by special leave seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 21st May, 2009 rendered by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2080 of 2003 and subsequent order dated 31.7.2009 passed by that Court in Review Petition No. 277 of 2009 dismissing both of them. The aforesaid Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2080 of 2003 sought to challenge the judgment and order rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal on 1st October, 2001 in O.A. No. 1436 of 2000 by which the Original Application filed by the Appellant herein was dismissed.

3. The short facts leading to these appeals are this wise. The Appellant joined his services as Sub Inspector of Police in the Central Bureau of Investigation ("CBI") in 1964 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Inspector of Police in 1966. He was eventually promoted to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in CBI with effect from 18th April, 1984.

4. It so transpired that Government of India constituted an Organization, namely. National Crime Records Bureau ("NCRB") by merging four units of Central Police Organizations, including the Data Section of the Co-ordination Division of CBI. Consequent upon this decision, 10 posts of this Data Section, including one post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, came to be transferred from CBI to NCRB on 11.11.1987 with complete Inter-state Crime Records. The Data Section of CBI was re-named as Crime Records Data Section in the NCRB. The Appellant was also transferred in the NCRB in public interest by Office Order dated 12.4.1988. As the order stated, consequent upon the transfer of the Data Section of the Co-ordination Division of CBI to NCRB, the services of the Appellant were placed at the disposal of NCRB on transfer basis and he was therefore relieved of his duties from the CBI with effect from the afternoon of 12th April, 1988. The Appellant was not asked whether he wanted to join this new organization. However, in pursuance of the aforesaid order he joined over there.

5. When the Appellant was transferred to that organization his pay, as it was in the CBI, remained protected. However, some four years thereafter when the pay of Deputy Superintendent of Police in CBI was reduced, his pay was also reduced from the pay-scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- to Rs. 2000-3500/- with effect from 13.4.1992. When the pay-scales of Deputy Superintendent of Police were restored, the pay of the Appellant also came to be restored on 10.6.1996 and upgraded from Rs. 2000-3500/- to Rs. 2200-4000/- which was equivalent to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police at the relevant time. Thus far, there was no difficulty. It, however, so transpired that in the year 1996, a batch mate of the Appellant one Shri T.N. Kapoor, who remained in the CBI and worked as Superintendent of Police, got further revision of pay-scale of 4100-5300/- with effect from 10.3.1996. Not only that, but a junior of his, namely, Shri Rajendra Prasad working as Superintendent of Police in the CBI was also given this revised pay-scale with effect from 26.3.1996. The Appellant was, however, not given this higher pay-scale.

6. The Appellant was subsequently promoted on 25.2.1997 to the next post of Joint Assistant Director which is equivalent to the post of Superintendent of Police in the CBI, but he was continued to be given lesser pay in the pay-scale of Rs. 3000-4500/-. Therefore, he made a representation on 17.4.1997 and made some further representations in this behalf. He stated in the representation specifically that: "neither I was asked nor I gave my option to remain in the NCRB during my entire service in the NCRB from 10.4.1988 onwards." After putting in 8 years of regular service in the rank of Superintendent of Police in the CBI he was not expecting such a reduction in his pay. The NCRB however rejected his representation after a period of two years by its communication dated 2nd August, 1999. This communication r