IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 5780 of 2008. Decided on: 11 th November, 2010. Rattani Devi and others. …Petitioners. -Versus- H.P. State Electricity Board. .…Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No ________________________________________________________ __ For the petitioners : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : Petitioners, though working as Senior Assistants, are claiming parity of pay-scale with the categories of Junior Engineer/Foreman. It has come in paragraph-2 of the legal submissions of the reply that the categories to which the petitioners belong were always getting lesser pay vis-a vis the Junior Engineers and Foremen. This has been demonstrated in tabular form. No rejoinder has been filed to rebut the averments made in this paragraph. Moreover, it is for the employer, primarily to decide what pay-scale is to be granted to a particular category taking into consideration the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, qualification and what duties discharged by the employees. Though it is well settled that while releasing the pay-scales, there should not be any unreasonableness or arbitrariness in the decision of the employer. However, in the instant case, there is neither any arbitrariness nor any unreasonableness since the petitioners have been getting lesser pay vis-a vis the Junior Engineers and Foremen. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge November 10, 2010. (bhupender)