JUDGMENT K.N. Goyal, J. - The petitioners are Senior LabAssistants in the techsicai cadre of Khig Georges Medical College and Gandhi Memorial Associated Hospitals, Lucknow in its different departments namely, Pathology, Medicines, Psychology, Psychiatry and Anatomy. Their case is that while Senior Lab Technicians working in district hospitals have been given the pay scale of Rs. 515860, the Senior LabAssistants of the institution in which the petitioners are working have been given the scale of Rs. 430635 only. Their contention is that there is no justification for this discrimination. The King Georges Medical College is the foremost medical institution in the State and the attached hospital are also of a superior category as compared to the district hospitals It is thus contended that the pay scale that be given to the petitioners should at least be the same as given to their counterparts working in the district hospitals. 2. The contention of the State, in reply, is that the new pay scale of Rs. 515860 has been allowed only to the posts of Senior Technicians in the district hospitals. There are no posts of Senior Technicians'in the Medical College and Associated hospitals. The posts on which the petitioners are working are those of Senior LabAssistants. The nature of duties of the posts of Senior LabAssistants and those of Senior LabTechnicians are different. 3. The reply of the petitioners to this contention is that in the district hospitals also, originally there were separate grades of LabAssistants and LabTechnicians and, likewise, of Senior LabAssistants and Senior LabTechnician. By a government order dated 10.3.1978, Annexure 2 to the writ petition, the government took the view that there was no difference in the duties and pay scales of the posts of LabAssistants/Senior LabAssistants and LabTechnicians/Senior LabTechnicians. As such, the two designations were merged; rather the designation of LabAssistant was dropped and all those who were working on the posts of LabAssistants were designated as LabTechnicians instead. A similar demand made by the LabAssistants and Senior LabAssistants of the King Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals was, however, turned down for no reason whatsoever. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, 5. Three counter affidavits have been filed in this case. First counter. affidavit was filed by the Principal of the Medical College itself. A similar demand made by the LabAssistants and Senior LabAssistants of the King Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals was, however, turned down for no reason whatsoever. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, 5. Three counter affidavits have been filed in this case. First counter. affidavit was filed by the Principal of the Medical College itself. He supported the stand of the state by making out two points of distinction in para 6 of his counter affidavit. It was stated that the nature of the word differs in different specialties. This averment was beside the point, in as much as we are not considering the difference of work performed by the Technicians or Assistants in different specialties. Indeed, the government itself has provided uniform pay scales for LabAssistants and Senior LabAssistants working in different specialties. The other distinction pointed out was that in para 11, namely that while for LabTechnicians, the government has prescribed a minimum educational qualification, namely, Intermediate with Science with experience in laboratory work or Diploma training, whereas in the case of Senior LabAssistants, no qualifications are prescribed. This was challenged by the petitioners in their rejoinder and it was asserted that no such qualifications had been prescribed by the government either. Indeed, the averment in para 11 of this counteraffidavit is somewhat selfcontradictory. If Intermediate with Science is sufficient qualification. It is not understood as to how Intermediate with Science with experience in laboratory work or Diploma training could be an alternative qualification. Moreover, it appears that the Principal in his recommendations to the government contained in his letter dated 21.3.1983 vide Annexure 10 to supplementary affidavit dated 2381983, had himself indicated (in the Annexure ka1 to the letter) that for Senior LabTechnicians in this college as well, the qualification of Intermediate with Science was prescribed. 6. Inspite of the denial of the correctness of this averment in the rejoinder filed by the petitioners, the government has not placed before us any rule or order from which it could be found that higher educational qualification is prescribed for government hospitals than for the King Georges Medical College and its Associated Hospitals. 7. That, apart, it is significant that what is mentioned in para 11 of the counter affidavit is that the government has prescribed qualifications for the posts of LabTechnicians. 7. That, apart, it is significant that what is mentioned in para 11 of the counter affidavit is that the government has prescribed qualifications for the posts of LabTechnicians. So far as the posts of LabAssistants andLabTechnicians are concerned, the pay scale awarded to the persons working in the District Hospitals and in the Associated Hospitals of King Georges Medical College are the same, namely, Rs. 400615 (ordinary grade) and Rs. 470735 (selection grade). It is only in of the posts of Senior LabTechnicians working in the hospitals that a discrimination has been made in as much as they have been given, the pay scale of Rs. 515860 while Senior LabAssistant working in the King Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals have been given the lower pay scale of Rs. 430685. If despite the prescription of a minimum educational qualification for the posts of LabTechnicians in the government hospitals and the nonprescription of any such qualification for the posts of LabAssistants in the King Georges Medical College and its Associated Hospitals, the LabTechnicians and LabAssistants working in those hospital1 respectively have been, given identical pay scales, there appears, no justification for not observing the parity in respect of the senior posts which are designated as posts of Senior LabTechnicians in district hospitals and as Senior LabAssistants in the rg Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals. 8. Mere difference in designation is immaterial, particularly in view of the government order, Annexure 2, referred to earlier, in which it was recognized that the work, duties and pay scales of Lab Assistants and LabTechnicians were identical and it was for this reason that the posts of district LabAssistants in the district hospitals were redesignated as posts of LabTechnicians. In view of this concession in this Government order, it does not stand to reason that a similar view should not have been taken inrespect of the posts of LabAssistants and Senior Lab Assistants in the King George's Medical College and Associated hospitals. 9. No other justification has been pointed out in the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the Director and the State Government. Those counter affidavits are confined to the newly added paragraphs of the writ petition. The only justification given is that the Government order is applicable only to district hospitals and has not been made applicable to the King Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals. Those counter affidavits are confined to the newly added paragraphs of the writ petition. The only justification given is that the Government order is applicable only to district hospitals and has not been made applicable to the King Georges Medical College and Associated Hospitals. This justification begs the question involved in the case inasmuch as it is this very discrimination which is the subject of challenge in the writ petition. 10. The case is, thus, squarely covered by the decision in Randhir Singh. v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 879 . In para 6 of the report, their Lordships observed as follows: We concede that equation of posts and equation of pay are mattes primarily for the Executive Government and expert bodies like Pay Commission and not for courts but we must hasten to say that where all things are equal that is, where all relevant consideration are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differentially in the matter of their pay merely because they belong to different departments. Of course, if officers of the same rank perform dissimilar functions and the powers, duties and responsibilities of the posts held by hem vary, such officers may not be heard to complain of dissimilar pay merely because the posts are of the same rank and the nomenclature is the same. 11. As no rational justification for the classification has been put forward before us, we hold that the classification is irrational arbitrary or discriminatory. Accordingly, the Senior LabAssistants working in the King George's Medical College and Gandhi Memorial Associated Hospitals, Lucknow are also entitled to the pay scales allowed to the Senior LabTechnicians of the district hospitals namely, Rs. 515860. 12. The writ petition is, 'accordingly, allowed and the writ of mandamus shall be issued to the opposite parties to place the petitioners in the payscale of Rs. 515860 with effect from the date on which this pay scale was granted to the Senior LabTechnicians working in the district hospitals. No order as to cost. (Petition allowed)