HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.06 of 2005 (S/B) Ram Chandra Bhardwaj …Petitioner Versus State of Uttaranchal & others ...Respondents Mrs. Joyace Irwin holding brief of Mr. D.S. Patni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned Additional Advocate General for the State/respondents. Dated : December 24th 2010 Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Barin Ghosh, C.J. (Oral) Petitioner was appointed on 5th January, 1987 in a post carrying a pay scale of ` 1000-1900/-. The nature of the post in which petitioner was appointed does not appear to be anything, but a civil post. The said appointment was however, not in civil service under the Government. There is no dispute that in respect of the said post, to which the petitioner was appointed, Governor had due authority to prescribe conditions of service under section 241(2)(b) of the Government of India Act. That being the situation, petitioner was from the date of his appointment, a Government servant. Because the post in which petitioner was appointed, is an ex-cadre post, and because as yet the Governor has not prescribed other conditions of service pertaining to the said post, petitioner has been denied of the revision of the pay scale effected upon acceptance of various 2 Pay Commission Reports. The stand taken by the State, while refusing to afford petitioner the upwardly revision of pay is deprecated, and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Government to give benefit of pay revisions of the scale of pay commensurate with the increases made to the pay scale of ` 1000-1900/- until today. Let the above exercise be completed by the State, as quickly as possible, but not later than three months from the date of service of a copy of this order upon respondent no.2. (V.K.Bist, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 24.12.2010 Arti