Precedent in legal matters underscores that similar issues must be resolved consistently, reinforcing judicial efficiency and finality in decisions.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The issue(s) raised in these petitions and the relief(s) sought are similar, therefore, these petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Vide W.P.(C) 7655/2022, petitioners seek directions to the respondents to reckon date of assumption of charge by petitioners to the post of Sub Inspector (Ministerial) with effect from date of promotion of petitioners to post of Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) and consequently grant one increment on 01.01.2006 in the pre-revised pay scale and thereafter next increment in the revised pay structure on 01.07.2006 in terms of paragraph 3 of office memorandum dated 19.03.2012 and other consequential benefits.

3. Vide W.P.(C) 8151/2022, petitioners seek directions to the respondents to reckon date of assumption of charge by petitioners to the rank of Head Constable (Ministerial) with effect from date of their appointment in said rank i.e. 01.12.2006 and thereafter grant one increment to the petitioners in the rank of Head Constable (Ministerial) on 01.07.2007 and re-fix their pay on said basis and consequently release arrears of pay to the petitioners.

4. Vide W.P.(C) 3930/2022, petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to reckon date of assumption of charge by petitioner to the post of Sub Inspector (Ministerial) with effect from 09.06.2000 (date of promotion of petitioner to post of Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) and consequently grant one increment on 01.01.2006 in the pre-revised pay scale and thereafter next increment in the revised pay structure on 01.07.2006 in terms of paragraph 3 of office memorandum dated 19.03.2012 and other consequential benefits.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue at hand is covered by a judgment of the coordinate Division Bench of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016 titled as `Vijayan V.V. vs. Union of India and others' decided on 01.04.2019.

6. Since the legal issue involved in the present writ petition stands finally settled by the judgment of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present writ petitions pending. Accordingly, this Court directs the respondents to treat the present writ petitions filed by the petitioners as representations in accordance with the judgment of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4448/2016 and decide the same by way of a reasoned order within six weeks.

7. With aforesaid directions, these three petitions stand disposed of. Pending applications also stand disposed of.