S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. The petitioner, in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questions orders dated 09.09.2009 and 05.05.2010 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter “the CAT”), in O.A. No. 242/2009 and R.A. No. 120/2010 (in O.A. No. 242/2009). The CAT rejected his claim for application of the Dynamic Assured Career Progression mechanism (hereafter “DACP”) to Veterinary Officers on the basis that the Central Pay Commission (hereafter “CPC”) recommended the same for only General Duty Medical Officers (hereafter “GDMOs”) and Dental Doctors.

2. The facts surrounding the present writ are that the Union Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (hereafter "UOI") introduced a time bound promotion scheme for its doctors including various cadres of the Central Health Services (hereafter “CHS”). This was termed as the DACP by the Fifth Central Pay Commission (hereafter referred to as “Fifth CPC”) with certain changes in the periodicity of promotion. The Fifth CPC recommended the application of the DACP to the officers of the CHS. It also recommended that there should be complete parity between Veterinary Officers, and GDMOs and Dental Doctors in ter