IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13259 of 2010 1. RAMRUP RABIDAS, SON OF LATE RAM KISHUN RABIDAS, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA NEW BHIGRAHPUR(NEAR MITHAPUR BUS STAND), P.S. JAKKANPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 2. RAJENDRA RAJAK, SON OF LATE BASUDEO RAJAK, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA MAHABIR NAGAR(HANUMAN NAGAR), P.S. PATRAKARNAGAR, DISTRICT PATNA. 3. SURENDRA KUMAR BHASKAR, SON OF LATE AVATAR KISHORE BHASKAR, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA LF-15, SRI KRISHNA PURI, P.S. S.K. PURI, DISTRICT PATAN. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR(ADMN.) CUM JOINT SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4. THE SECRETARY, FINANCE(BUREAU OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISES) DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 5. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE TEXT BOOK PUBLISHING CORPORATION, PATHYA PUSTAK BHAWAN, BUDH MARG, PATNA-800001. 6. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE TEXT BOOK PUBLISHING CORPORATION, PATHYA PUSTAK BHAWAN, BUDH MARG, PATNA-800001. For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Roy, advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Sandeep Kumar, advocate. ----------- 02. 25.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners are serving as Store Assistant in the Text Book Publishing Corporation(hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). They are aggrieved by the resolution of the State Government bearing Memo No.125 dated 1.2.2010, Annexure-5, whereunder in consideration of the recommendation of the 6th pay revision committee Store Assistant has been allowed the scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/-, although the Committee/Corporation taking into consideration the scale allowed to the Store Assistant during the earlier revision had recommended for grant of scale of Rs.5,500-9,000/. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that other Store Assistants like Accounts Assistant and Proof Readers who were previously in the scale of Rs.2,500-2,750/-, like the petitioners and other Assistants, have been allowed the higher scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/- - 2 - but it is only the Store Assistants who have been differentiated without there being any tangible differentia to differentiate their case. In support of such contention learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the earlier pay scale granted to the Store Assistant as also over the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hazari Lal Vs. State of Haryana, reported in AIR 1988 Supreme Court 1504 and Randhir Singh Vs. Union of India and others, reported in AIR 1982 Supreme Court 879. Highlighting the aforesaid anomaly petitioners have represented before the Managing Director of the Corporation. The Corporation in consideration of the recommendation of the pay revision committee had recommended to the State Government grant of higher scale to the petitioners and other Store Assistant but the Government in its wisdom chose not to accept the recommendation of the Corporation. In the circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to permit the petitioners to represent before the State government requesting the Government to modify the resolution dated 1.2.2010, Annexure-5 by granting the petitioners and other Store Assistant higher scale of Rs.5,000-8,000/-. 3. Let petitioners file fresh representation along with a copy of this order before the Principal Secretary of the Human Resources Development Department who should consider the same in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of two months from the de of its receipt. 4. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)