Eligibility for time-bound promotions requires completing designated service periods in entry roles, which the petitioners failed to meet.

1. This Writ Appeal has been filed by the State against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 14/02/2007 in OP No. 24885 of 1998. Learned Single Judge allowed the Original Petition filed by the petitioners. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the State has come up in appeal.

2. Brief facts of the case necessary for deciding the appeal are: Both the petitioners entered in service as trainee Police Constables in Armed Police Bettalion on 01/08/1974. After training they were regularly appointed as Police Constables with effect from 01/06/1975. They were promoted as Hawildar on 20/04/1981. On their willingness they were reverted as Police Constables and transferred to District Armed Reserve on 07/06/1982 where they were promoted as Head Constables on 08/06/1982. On their written request petitioners were transferred to local police. They joined local police on 18/12/1991. From 18/12/1991 they were working as Police Constables but due to administrative delay, their pay was not regularised immediately and their pay was regularised on 31/10/1993 and certain excess amounts from 18/12/1991 to 31/12/1993 was recovered. Petitioners were granted 20 years higher grade from 01/06/1995 in the scale of Assistant Sub Inspector. The 1st petitioner submitted a representation on 05/06/1996 praying that he may be granted 10 years and 20 years higher grade. The representation was rejected by letter dated 04/10/1996 of the Inspector General of Police, Ext.P11. The Inspector General of Police mentioned in his letter that 20 years higher grade has been sanctioned with effect from 01/06/1995. It was further mentioned that the period of service as Hawildar will be excluded from the grant of higher grade in the category of Police Constable. The 1st petitioner filed OP No. 20457 of 1997 in this Court. This Court directed the authority to consider the claim. By letter, Ext. P15 the representation submitted by the 1st petitioner was again rejected. Second petitioner was also sanctioned 20 years higher grade with effect from 01/06/1995. Both petitioners aggrieved by the action of the respondents have filed the Writ Petition praying for the following reliefs:
"i) issue a writ of certiorari, or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Exts. P12, P13 and P15.
ii) declare that the petitioners are entitled to get 10 years time bound higher grade as they have completed 10 years as Police Constable and 20 years second time bound higher grade by reckoning their services as Police Constable and Head Constable together, as ordered in Exts. P2, P4 and P6.
iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to grant the benefits as prayed for in the above prayer No. ii and also to restore the petitioners the amount of Rs.4694 and Rs.3000 respectively recovered from the petitioners' without any authority of law and to restore their salary in the post of Head Constable.
iv) issue such other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case
v) award the cost of this Original Petition."

3. A counter - affidavit was filed by the respondents pleading that petitioners were not entitled to 10 years higher grade since they had not completed 10 years service in the entry level on account of intermittent promotion as Hawildar and in view of the fact that total period the petitioners completed was 20 years hence they were granted 20 years higher grade. Learned Single Judge by judgment dated 14/02/2007 directed to recompute the higher grade promotion benefit of the petitioners treating them as continuing Police Constables in the Armed Forces Battalion ever since their appointme