IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 147 OF 2009 The Union of India and others. ... Petitioners. V/s. CWPRS Kamgar Sabaha and another. ... Respondents. G.Hariharan with S.S.Pakale for the petitioners. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : 15th September 2009. P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. We were taken through the impugned order. The relevant part of the order reads as under: 17. There are two important aspects in this mater to the considered. Firstly, para 55.253 of V-CPC talks about equation of the post of Head Store Keeper with that of the Head Clerk. As such, the respondents cannot take shelter of this aspect to snatch away benefit from the applicants, particularly, when the benefit has been granted to the applicants in clear terms. There is no ambiguity in the order dated 05.03.1998 by which the applicants were granted the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000. It was a conscious decision taken by the respondents, without any infirmity irregularly or inadvertence of any kind. Secondly, it is, no doubt, true that the post of Head Store Keeper on equation with Head Clerk was placed in the Pay scale of Rs.1600-2660 w.e.f. 01.01.1986. But in the present case, the respondents by their order dated 05.03.1998, have treated and equated the post of Head Store Keeper at par with the post of Chief Store Keeper which carries the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900. Once this is done, the post of Head Store Keeper would also be automatically kept in the higher pay scale of Rs.1640-2900. Otherwise, the whole exercise of equation or merger of the posts of Head Store Keeper and Chief Store Keeper would be a useless and futile. Therefore, we hold that the grant of the scale of Rs.5500-9000 to the applicants by order dated 05.03.1998 was rightly done and was not done inadvertently or as a result of typographical error. 18. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the action of the respondents in unilaterally seeking to reduce the pay scale of applicants from Rs. 5500-9000 to Rs.5000-8000 is totally unwarranted, illegal and arbitrary and, hence, unsustainable in the eyes of law. The applicants have been enjoying the benefits of pay scales of Rs.5500-9000 right from 01.01.1996. Therefore, the respondents cannot be allowed to suddenly somersault and reduce the pay scale of the applicants on the ground of inadvertence or negligence or error. We hold that the action of the respondents was a well considered decision to grant the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 and, thus, the contention of the respondents in this regard is untenable in law and on facts. The impugned orders dated 28.03.2005, 26.04.2005, 11.12.2003, and 22.12.2003 are hereby quashed and set aside. 2. Having seen the findings recorded by the Tribunal, we see no infirmity in the said order. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view. By no stretch of imagination, the impugned order cannot be said to be a perverse order. This court not being a court of appeal is not expected to go into the evidence and appreciate it once again. 3. In the result, petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)