Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 275 of 2006 Tika Singh Adhikari & others ………….Petitioners. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others ………Respondents. Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Advocate for the respondents. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. The short claim for the petitioners in the present writ petition is that they were entitled to a particular pay-scale being Principal of Government Intermediate Colleges as per the Government Order of the State of Uttarakhand dated 21.12.2001 but they are not being paid this pay-scale. The petitioners have also alleged that whereas the same scale is being paid to their counterparts in private colleges, which are under grant in aid, the same pay-scale is being denied to them merely because they are Principals in Government colleges. The contention of the State in this regard is that a parity cannot be drawn between the petitioners (who are Principals in Government colleges) and Principals of private though under grant in aid colleges because unlike their counterparts in Private (though under grant in aid), colleges the petitioners have a further avenue of promotion to the cadre of District Education Officers which is not available to the Principals of private colleges. Be that as it may, the State counsel further asserts in his counter affidavit that although this pay-scale was not given to the petitioners in year 2003, the same is being given to the petitioners from 2006 onwards and, therefore, in any case the petitioners have no cause of action left. The question is only for the arrears of this enhanced pay- 2 scale during this period. Since on principle the State Government has already accepted the contention of the petitioners of granting them the same pay-scale, which is applicable to the Principals of grant in aid colleges, there is no justifiable reason to deny the petitioners the arrears of salary which has been accrued to the petitioners. Once the State Government has agreed to grant the same pay-scale to the petitioners on principle, therefore, to contend that earlier it was not being given to the petitioners, as the petitioners have got further chances of promotion, looses its meaning as the situation as it existed in 2003 continues to remain at present as well. In short, there is no justifiable reason for the respondents to deny the arrears of salary to the petitioners as has accrued to them. We must also add that there is no change in situation of the petitioners vis-a-vis the Principals who were working in private though under grant in aid colleges. Therefore, the order dated 20.11.2006 (Annexure 4 to the Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 2), whereby the pay-scale of Rs. 10,000 – 15,200 has been granted to the petitioners from 20.11.2006 appears to be arbitrary to the extent it fixes the salary of the petitioners from 20.11.2006 (i.e. from the date the order has been passed) and not from the date the said salary was available to the counterparts of the petitioners who were working as Principals in private though under grant in aid colleges. To that extent, the order dated 20.11.2006 is hereby set aside. The pay-scale of Rs. 10,000 – 15,200 shall be given to the petitioners from the date it was made applicable to the Principals in grant in aid colleges. Consequently, a Mandamus is issued to the respondent to revise the pay-scale of the present petitioners from the date the same scale was made effective for the Principals in private colleges though under grant in aid colleges. Respondent no. 1 is hereby directed to calculate the said amount and release the same to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is handed over to him. 3 Writ Petition is allowed in the terms stated above. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 26.07.2010 Avneet