MANOJIT BHUYAN, J.

1. Heard Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents. At our request, Mr. Arvind Sharma, Deputy Judge Advocate General, Sashatra Seema Bal is present before the Court and have assisted in the hearing of this case.

2. The petitioners entered into Sashatra Seema Bal as Constable (Nursing Orderly), which along with Constable (Medic) were the entry grade post in the Combatised Medical Staff (Group C Non-Gazetted). The next higher rank to which the petitioners along with Constable (Medic) were eligible for promotion is the post of Head Constable (Medic). At the time of their recruitment they were governed under the Sashatra Seema Bal Group Centres Combatised Medical Staff (Group C Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1991 (in short 1991 Rules). The said 1991 Rules was superseded by Sashatra Seema Bal Combatised Medics Cadre (Non- Professional) Group C Posts Recruitment Rules, 2008 (in short 2008 Rules). Under the said 2008 Rules, the post of Head Constable (Medic) was made a non-selection grade post, to be filled up by 100% promotion from amongst (i) Constable (Medic) having not less than three years regular service in the scale of pay of Rs.3050-4590/- and (ii) Constable (Nursing Orderly) having not less than three years regular service in the scale of pay of Rs.2750- 4400/-.

3. As and when a Combined Eligibility List dated 13.08.2009 was issued for the purpose of filling up 57 posts of Head Constable (Medic), the petitioners found their names placed below those Constables (Medics) who were junior to them. Aggrieved, one of the petitioners made representation dated 19.08.2009 claiming seniority over the Constable (Medics) figuring at serial nos. 3 to 24 in the List. The said representation was considered and disposed of and in this regard the respondents issued Message dated 01.09.2009 highlighting their stand to the effect that in terms of DoPT Office Memorandum dated 10.09.1985 and Office Memorandum dated 12.12.1998 those in the higher scale of pay would rank senior to those in the lower scale of pay. In the case in hand, whereas Constable (Medic) were drawing a higher scale of pay of Rs.3050-4590/-, the Constable (Nursing Orderly) were drawing lesser pay in the scale of Rs.2750-4400/-

4. Although the petitioners were eventually promoted to Head Constable (Medic) , in the Seniority List of Head Constable (Medics) , contained in Memo dated 12.12.2012, they were placed below persons who were recruited as Constable (Medics) at a later point of time than the petitioners. The 2008 Rules was also superseded by a new set of Rules called the Sashatra Seema Bal Combatised Medics Cadre (Non-Professional) Group B and C" Posts Recruitment Rules, 2012 (in short 2012 Rules). In the said 2012 Rules, serial no. 3 pertains to the promotional post of Head Constable (Medic). In the second sub-para under column 11 at serial no. 3, a differentiation is made with regard to seniority between Constable (Medic) and Constable (Nursing Orderly). To be precise, the second sub-para is reproduced hereunder:

"While considering promotion of Constable (Medic) and Constable (Nursing Orderly) who have been appointed prior to the 1st January, 2006, Constable (Medic) shall be considered as senior to Constable (Nursing Orderly). After the 1st January, 2006, the promotion of Constable (Medic) and Constable (Nursing Orderly) shall be considered as per their common seniority."

5. The above facts have been extracted from the available materials on record. On these facts, Mr. D. Borah makes submission that since the training courses, method of recruitment, age limit and qualifications for entry, either as Constable (Medic) or Constable (Nursing Orderly) , being the same, the petitioners could not have been denied the higher pay scale as made admissible to Constable (Medic) . Mr. Borah also submits that