( 1 ). Rule D. B. Mr. K. B. S. Rajan counsel for the petitioner has contended that after the recommendation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission, the petitioner has been denied the fixation of pay while taking into consideration the spirit of the integrated broad band pay scale introduced for the first time in the armed forces w. e. f. 1. 1. 86. The first argument was that denial of increment of four years service when he was stagnating at the maximum of Rs. 1900/- in the pre revised scale was not correct and same was not in the spirit of integrated broad band pay scale as introduced and recommended by the Fourth Pay Commission. The second contention of the counsel for the petitioner was that provision of leave encashment was made available w. e. f. 1. 1. 86 to all the civilians as well as para military personnel and denial of the same uniformly to the officers of the armed forces was arbitrary and illegal. He contended grant of leave encashment from 30. 12. 98 to the officers of the armed forces and fixing a cut off date from 30. 12. 1991 prospectively was discriminatory as well as arbitrary. Lastly, it was contended before us that the petitioner was re-employed and