JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition is filed by petitioner Chaiten Prakash, Junior Engineer posted under the Rajasthan State Electricity Board. 2. Briefly stated the facts are these. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer on 24-5-1965 under the Rajasthan State Electricity Board. His services were placed at the disposal of the Rajasthan Government and he joined there on 3-6-1965 and continued to serve the Government till 30-6-1970. He was relieved from his deputation from 1-7-1970 arid reverted to its present department. Rajasthan Government issued revised pay-scale rules in the year 1961 and then amended revised Pay Scales Rules, 1966. Thereafter, the Rajasthan Government further amended the Pay Scales by Ranwat Pay Scale Rules, 1968 with effect from 1-9-1969. The Electricity Board also revised the pay scales of its employees by the Wage Board Pay Scale Rules, 1969. The question of the petitioner's fixation under the Ranawat Pay Scale Rules, 1968 and the Wage Board Pay Scale Rules 1969 were under consideration before the respondents. But me how, his fixation of pay under the Ranawat Pay Scale Rules, 1968 and the Wage Board Pay Scale Rules, 1969 was pending till the institution of this writ petition filed in 1973. The reliefs sought in the writ petition were as follows:- "It is, therefore, prayed that your Lordship will be pleased to issue a writ in the matter of mandamus, direction or order directing the non-petitioners to decide the case of fixation of the pay of the petitioner under Ranawat Pay Scale Rules, 1968 and Board Pay Scale Rules, 1969 within a period of one month from the issue of writ, direction or order ; Any your Lordships will be pleased to direct the non-petitioners to make payment of the arrears within a reasonable time." The respondents have not filed any reply to the writ petition. However, it transpires from the proceedings dated July 8, 1980 that the Electricity Board has already revised the pay of the petitioner and also paid the arrears of the pay to the petitioner. However, it transpires from the proceedings dated July 8, 1980 that the Electricity Board has already revised the pay of the petitioner and also paid the arrears of the pay to the petitioner. It further appears that the stand of the Board was that from 3-6-1965 to 30-6-1970, the petitioner was on deputation with the State Government and the liability for payment of arrears of pay on the basis of revised pay for the period of deputation is of the State Government and the Board had already written to the State Government to pay the arrears due to the petitioner for this period. It is, therefore, evident that the petitioner has not to seek any relief from respondents No. 1 and 2. 3. It further transpires from the writ Petition that the respondents No. 3 and 4 have revised the pay of the petitioner under the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1961 and amended the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1966. However, from the relief clause, it is not clear that for what period, the petitioner is claiming his arrears of pay. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and is learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State and perused the record of the case carefully. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the State Government may be directed to revise the pay and emoluments of the petitioner under Ranawat Pay Scale Rules, 1968. I have considered the argument carefully. At that rate, the petitioner should be paid, would depend upon the terms of the deputation of the petitioner with the State Government. It is not made clear either in the writ petition or during the course of the arguments whether the deputation pay admissible to the petitioner during the period of deputation would be according to the pay scale admissible to him as an employee of the Rajasthan State Electricity Board or he was to get pay, payable to an employee of the State Government for the post held by the petitioner. However, this much is certain that liability is of the State Government to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioner for the period he was on deputation with the State Government. However, this much is certain that liability is of the State Government to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioner for the period he was on deputation with the State Government. In the fitness of things, the State Government Should revise the pay admissible to him as per terms of the deputation under the relevant rules and make the payment of the arrears of pay as a consequence of the revised pay fixation. The State Government may do this in consultation with the Rajasthan State Electricity Board. 6. In the result, the writ petition is partly accepted and it is directed that respondents No. 3 and 4 would make the necessary fixation of pay of the petitioner as is admissible to him according to the terms of the deputation under the relevant rules within four months from the date of this order and make payment of arrears, if any.No order as to costs are passed in the facts and circumstances of the case.Petition partly allowed. *******