IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 4018 of 2008. Date of decision: 19.10.2010. Parkash Chand ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting : For the Petitioner : Mr. H.R. Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K.Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. and Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner has prayed for following relief in the writ petition:- That the applicant who is senior than the respondent No.4, his pay may be refixed with retrospective effect from March, 2986 by stepping up so that the senior do not get the less pay than the junior and while refixing the pay of the applicant, the benefit of further seniority of sixteen months than the respondent No. 4 may also be considered in the interest of justice. 2. It is stated in the reply as follows:- “The applicant was appointed in the Deptt. as clerk during the month 8/85 and his pay was fixed in the scale of ` 400-600 at a maximum of `600/- after giving military service benefit and respondent No. 4 Shri Gopal Dass clerk was appointed as clerk in the Deptt. on 21.3.86 and his pay was fixed in the scale of ` 950- 2 1800 after giving 18 years military service benefit ` 1440/-. The applicant definitely gets less pay from respondent No. 4, because the pay scale of the respondent No. 4 was different to the pay scale of the applicant at the time of appointment in the Deptt. In H.P. Govt. letter No. Ft. 1(B) 7-1/92 dated 15.9.93 it has clearly been mentioned that in such cases there is no provision to give step-up increment to the senior against the Junior. (Annexure R- 1 attached ). Hence the question of giving step-up increment to the applicant in this case does not arise.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under FR 22C there are instructions for stepping up the pay in case there is anomaly in pay fixation. Therefore, the petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner shall file appropriate representation before the first respondent within one month from today in which case the matter shall be duly examined by the first respondent with notice to the petitioner and appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with law and justice within another four months. In case the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the ensuing consequential benefits shall also be disbursed to the petitioner within another two months. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. October 19, 2010. (Justice Kuldip Singh), (GR/Hem) Judge.