Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Vijay Gautam and Sri A.R. Chaurasiya, learned Counsels for petitioners, Sri S.P. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pankaj Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents and perused the record. Rest of the counsels for petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions have adopted the arguments advanced by Sri Gautam and Sri Chaurasiya.

2. In all these matters, common question of facts and law are involved and, therefore, as agreed and requested by learned counsel for parties, have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. It is also worthy to notice that there are three writ petitions in which detaild arguments have been advanced, i.e., Writ Petition No. 9522 of 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “first petition”, Writ Petition No. 11139 of 2013 hereinafter referred to as “second petition”) and 25949 of 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “third petition”) and the record of these three cases have been referred interchangeably during the course of arguments.

4. As requested and agreed by learned counsels for the parties, the counter and rejoinder-affidavit filed in first petition has been read in all other matters.

5. In fact pleadings have been referred to by respective counsels interchangeably with the consent of parties and it is in these facts and circumstances, as agreed and requested, these matters have been heard for final disposal at this stage under the Rules of the Court without keeping them pending for the purpose of exchange of pleading separately in all other connected matters.

6. In the first petition, there are 61 petitioners. All, except petitioner No. 61, are Constables in Provincial Armed Constabulary (hereinafter referred to as “PAC”) and petitioner No. 61 is Constable in Civil Police. They were appointed between 1987 to 1994 and by now have completed 19 to 25 years of service.

7. The dispute in short involves whether petitioners, who are receiving Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/-, are entitled to get Grade Pay of Rs. 2800/- as next Assured Carrier Progression (hereinafter referred to as “ACP”) or 4200/-. Those petitioners, who became due for the next ACP grade after 2400/- have been placed in the Grade Pay of Rs. 2800/- while the claim is that 2800/- is not a Grade Pay admissible in the hierarchy of subordinate Police Force officials, therefore, they should be placed in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-.

8. To understand the entire controversy in respect to hierarchy as also the pay-scales, permissible ACP, a few facts in retrospect about the provisions relating to pay revision etc. need be referred hereat.

9. In the subordinate ranks of Police Officers, the lowest rank is “Constable” and next higher promotional rank is “Head Constable”, “Sub-inspector” and lastly “Inspector”.

10. Before implementation of 6th Pay Commission’s recommendation in State of U.P. with effect from 1.1.2006, and prior thereto, the Constables were in the pay-scale of 3050-4590, Head Constables in 3200-4900 and Sub-inspectors in the Scale of Rs. 5000-8000.

11. In the past, due to lack of promotional avenues, the Government felt that a large number of serving officials were stagnating in the initial pay-scale and the rank in which they entered the service. This stagnation was creating a serious dissatisfaction affecting services. Hence, after the implementation of recommendation of 4th Pay Commission, a scheme of additional increment and promotional scale was implemented so as to provide some respite to those who were stagnating in the same pay-scale. A Government Order dated 3.6.1989 was issued which provided one increment after rendering 10 years of satisfactory service to those Government employees who were in the scale maximum whereof was Rs. 3500. After rendering a total 16 years of satisfactory service, next promotional pay-scale was provided if the Government servant had not been promoted earlier or in the 16th year. This benefit of additional increment