1 ca 10218.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10218 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6902 OF 2008 Sanjay S/o Jagannath Jadhav .. Applicant Versus The Chairman, Indai Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha, Dhule and others .. Respondents Shri V. D. Sapkal, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri S. P. Brahme, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri S. B. Pulkundwar, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 18TH NOVEMBER, 2011. PER COURT : . This is an application filed seeking directions against the present non applicants to deposit the amount of salary as per the statement annexed at Exhibit – C. 2. There is dispute amongst the parties regarding the amount of salary receivable by the present applicant. Shri Brahme, the 2 ca 10218.11 learned counsel submits that the applicant would be entitled to the salary as per the Vth Pay Commission, whereas Shri Sapkal, the learned counsel submits that the applicant is entitled to the salary as per VIth Pay Commission. It is not disputed that the applicant was appointed in the year 1999. The School Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the present applicant granting him reinstatement with continuity of service and backwages. This Court while admitting the petition had stayed the order passed by the School Tribunal only to the extent of backwages. Rest of the order passed by the School Tribunal was not stayed. The applicant is reinstated in service. In view of the fact that the other teachers who are appointed prior to 2006 are paid salary as per VIth Pay Commission, so also the applicant would be entitled for amount as per the VIth Pay Commission. The amount as per VIth Pay Commission should be paid to the applicant at least from September 2010 and the applicant shall be paid the amount as per the VIth Pay Commission month to month. The civil application is disposed of. The amount directed is to be deposited within a period of six (6) weeks from today. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Nov. 11