IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No.9087 of 2008 Decided on: April 7, 2011. Sohan Singh …….Petitioner. Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others. …….Respondents. _________________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : None. For the respondents : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “i) That the respondent Corporation may be directed to re-fix the pay of the applicant at Rs. 3220/- in the pay scale of Rs. 3120- 5160 instead of the initial start of Rs.3120/- given to the applicant w.e.f. 1.1.1996 onwards, till today, forthwith. ii) That the respondent Corporation may be directed to give an initial start at Rs.3220/- to the applicant, who is a conductor, at par on the same analogy as the higher start of Rs.32220/- has been given to the category of Clerks, when in the past, i.e. on 1.1.1986 and on 1.1.1996 i.e. as per annexures A-1 and A-2 the revised pay scales were identical of both the categories in the past and the discrimination brought in the year 2001 retrospectively from 1.1.1996 only for clerks and not for the applicant who is a conductor may be declared illegal, discriminatory, without any rationale and thus unconstitutional.” 2. In the reply, at paragraph 3, it is stated as follows: “Notwithstanding the past parity in scales, if any, of the category of the applicant i.e. conductors with that of clerks on 1..1.986 and 2 1.1.1996, the present OA filed by the applicant seeking higher initial start at Rs.3220/- in the pay scale of Rs.3120-5160 from 1.1.1996 on the basis of the notification dated 31.5.2001 i.e. annexure A-3 to the OA, is not maintainable when, the aforesaid notification i.e. A-3 has been issued by the Pay Revision Authority i.e. The State Govt. only regarding the category of clerks specifically. However, since the applicant has already crossed the basic pay of Rs.3220/- on 1.1.1996 and was drawing a basic pay of Rs.4260/- the claim is wrong.” 3. In case the petitioner has still any grievance left, he may approach the first respondent by filing a representation. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice April 7, 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tilak/jai) Judge.