S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. :- The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the Time Bound Promotional Scale was not awarded to him with effect from 1-6-1989 but with effect from 1-6-1995.

2. The petitioner was appointed in the year 1968 and was initially posted at the Secretariat, Panaji, Goa. Subsequently, he was posted as Talathi in the year 1971. He has retired from service after attaining age of superannuation. He retired after 35 years of service with effect from 30-6-2003.

3. The petitioner came to be appointed as Talathi in the year 1971 and at the relevant time was posted at the office of Mamlatdar at Mormugao. He was also transferred as Talathi to various places and in the writ petition, the petitioner has referred to a case of missing files of mutation register in the year 1991 for which a memo was issued to him. .

4. However, it is common ground before us that these proceedings are not relevant for the purposes of considering this claim to the Time Bound Promotional Scales with effect from 1-6-1989.

5. The petitioner does not dispute that in the year 1989, the Government of Goa brought a scheme named Time Bound Promotional Scale (T.B.P.S.) for the Government employees. He was working as a Talathi from the year 1971 and he completed 12 years' of service as Talathi in the year 1983. The scheme for T.B.P.S. stipulates that upon completion of 12 years' regular service, the incumbent shall be entitled to a promotional scale. The case of the petitioner is that the T.B.P.S. ought to have been awarded to him with effect from 1-6-1989. The petitioner, however, has been awarded the same with effect from 1-6-1995. It is his grievance that all Talathis who are similarly situated have been awarded the scales with effect from 1-6-1989. The other incumbents who were posted as Junior Stenographers, Upper Division Clerks, have been granted this scale immediately upon completion of 12 years' service. Reliance is placed by the petitioner on a letter dated 30-8-2000.

6. However, in paragraph 13 of the petition, the petitioner himself states that he has been denied the benefit of T.B.P.S. with effect from 1-6-1989 on account of adverse remarks. He contends in paragraph 13 that though the appeal for expunging of the said remarks, is pending before Chief Secretary Goa and that is how, a legal notice dated 10-12-2002 came to be issued and no action having been taken, he approached this Court.

7. Now, it is stated before us that adverse remarks which are referred to paragraph 13 pertain to the year 1991-1992 and they were not made basis of denying T.B.P.S. Our attention is also drawn to the fact that subsequently, pending representations have been disposed of.

8. We are not concerned with this aspect of the matter inasmuch as an affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents and the Collector of South Goa has affirmed it in paragraphs 3 & 4 of the same, it is stated thus:

"3. By representation dated 13-10-1992 addressed to the Collector South Goa the undersigned had clarified that there is no negligence on his part in keeping the land records. As far as register in Form IX of village Sancoale the inquiry was dropped by letter dated 6-1-1994. As far as 9 other mutation cases the same were handed over to Shri Kapileshwari ex-Talathi of Velsao village however the matter pertaining to 9 mutation cases cannot form basis of adverse remarks contained in memo dated 19th August, 1992 as memos were issued to on 21-9-1992 pertaining to the said mutation cases."

4. The appellant further submits that no memo was given to him about the alleged negligence in keeping the land records during the period from 1-4-1991 to 31-2-1992 and as the inquiry about Form No. IX mutation register has been dropped the same cannot form the basis for adverse remarks in the Confidential Role of the appellant. In the memo at page 4 the appellant has clarified that mutation register Form No. IX had been handed over to the Circle Inspector D. B. Joshi and con