( 1 ) PETITIONER Shri C. M. Khanna retired as Lt. Coloncl (Time Scale) from Army Service. He has challenged the Special Army Instructions 1/8/87 dated 23rd June,1987 issued by the Defence Ministry by virtue of which the respondent implemented the recommendation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission for the officers of the Army. Consequent upon the recommendation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission integrated pay scale of Rs. 2300-5100. 00 was made admissible to officers of the Army above the rank of Second Lieutenant to Brigadier. But with regard to the officers of the substantive rank of the Lt. Colonel (Time Scale) omission has been made to regulate their initial fixation of pay as on 1st January,1986, in relation to prescribed length of reckonable service as required for substantive promotion. The aim of providing one integrated scale for officers from the rank of second Lt. to Brigadier was to give one scale-related with length of service. But this has been denied to Lt. Colonel (Time Scale) hence discrimination and denial of equal rights.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the challenge the brief facts arc that petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army on 15th June, 1966 with antedate seniority from 15th June,1964. He was promoted to the substantive rank of Ll. Colonel (Time Scale) in 1986 w. e. f. 15th Junt,1985,on completion of 21 years of reckonable service. The recommendation of the Fourth Central pay Commission in 1987 were accepted by the Union of India. Chapter-28 of the said Report deals with the recommendation for Armed Forces Personnel. Pursuance to the same respondent issued Special Army lnstruction 1/8/87 on 23ard June,1987 (in short SAI,1987 ). According to petitioner, the said SAI,1987 deals with three aspects in order to implement the recommendations namely; (1) Revision of Pay scale; (2) Fixation of initial pay in the revised scale; (3)Regulation of pay on promotion subsequent to 1st January,1986. The basic pay of every Officer from the rank of Second Lieutenant to Brigadier comprised of two ele- ments namely pay in the integrated scale plus rank pay as per the rank held. Two factors which require special consideration are (i) fixation of initial pay namely an amount representing 20% of the basic pay in existing scale to be added to the existing emoluments of the Officer; and (ii) an amount equivalent to the rank pay, if any, appropriate to the rank held by the officer as on 1st January,1986 was to be deducted and thereafter officer s pay was to be fixed in the integrated scale at the stage next above the amount thus computed. Further according to petitioner on the basis of this factor of 20% of the existing basic pay the pay in the integrated scale for officers of the rank of substantive Lt. Colonel (Time Scale ). Lt. Colonel (by selection ). Colonel and Brigadier had to be worked out. The minimum pay in the integrated scale was to be different for different ranks provided they had completed specified length of reckonable commissioned service. On this post the pay was to be stepped up to be minimum in the integrated scale. The integrated scale of pay was to cover the time span of 24 years. Therefore, the minimum pay in the integrated scale for each rank related to completed length of reckonable commissioned service. The new integrated scale in relation to completed length of reckonable commissioned service was not given. SAI,1987 made provision for stepping up pay on promotion subsequent to. 1st January, 1986 to the minimum for the rank provided that the officer had completed the length of reckonable commissioned service as prescribed for each rank. The idea behind this was to give benefit to the officers to be brought into new integrated scale. But unfortunately this provision of minimum pay in the integrated scale based on completion of specified length of Commissioned Service for substantive promotion has not been made applicacle to the officers promoted to the substantive rank of Lt. Col