Dr. T.N. Singh, J.- l. Tekanpur is a place near Gwalior, where there are several installations and institutions of the Border Security Force. One such installation is the Tear Smoke Unit, engaged in the manufacture of tear smoke material. Central Act No. 47 of 1968, called "The Border Security Force Act, 1968" was enacted to provide for the constitution and regulation of the said Force for ensuring the security of the borders of India. Chapter II of the Act contains provisions concerning conditions of service of the members of the said Force. Section 11 prescribes the procedure for "dismissal, removal or reduction" (in rank) of the members of the Force, wherein it is provided by sub-section (4) that the power exercisable thereunder "shall be subject to the provisions of this Act and the Rules". Section 141 of the Act contemplates making of rules for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the Act. The Border Security Force (Subordinate Officers and Under-Officers) Promotion and Seniority Rules, 1975 have been framed under section 141 of the Act.

2. Writ petitioners-one M. P. No. 307 of 1984, eight in M. P. No. 376 of 1984 and another one in M. P. No 528 of 1984 are all "Under-Officers" of Border Security Force, serving in the Tear Smoke Unit at Tekanpur. Because common points of law are involved in all these cases, the petitions were beard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. The common grievance of all the petitioners is singular, complaining infraction of their statutory rights contemplated under the Act and the Rules. They are holding the posts or Naik and there are impending orders of their being "posted out" and reduced in rank. Respondents rely on the terms of what they call "Promotion Orders" made in each case and duly recorded in the Service Book of each of the petitioners. It is common' case of the parties that the petitioners were Constables before being promoted to the rank of the Naik and indeed, they got "accelerated promotions" which was contemplated under the Rules. It is, however, respondents' case that the petitioners have no legal right to resist orders of "posting out" inasmuch as in each case, the petitioner has served in the Tear Smoke Unit in the rank of Naik for a period of more than three years. This stand was taken to repel the charge of hostile discrimination in virtue of Article 16 of the Constitution as the petitioners contend that they have been singled out for demotion by impending orders of "posting out" inasmuch as other officers similarly situate, have been spared the ordeal and humiliation. Reliance was placed by the petitioners' side on the statement made in pare 9 (i) of the return in M. P. No. 376/84, wherein it is asserted that "the respondents have every right to implement the said order as and when the retention of the petitioners in T. S. U. is not found to be justified and they are treated as unsuitable". However, in a supplementary return, filed in the case, this position is clarified by stressing that petitioners had not undergone the prescribed pre-promotion tests and their suitability to hold the post remained open to be adjudged.

4. At one stage, I had taken the view that the petitions should be disposed of on a single point, but the factual background being nebulous, I insisted on the parties to clear the cloud so that I could stand on terra firma to decide the issue. It was contended by the petitioners that the respondents themselves asked the petitioners to make an option and the requirement having been complied with, the effect of the conditional promotion order in which the respondents reserved the right to "post out" the petitioners, was wiped out. However, what the option papers, filed by the parties, reveal is that the petitioners were holding "temporary posts" of Naik ("NK (T)") in the Tear Smoke Unit and in each case their substantive appointment was in the rank of "L.C" (Constable). It is also disclosed that the petitioners off