MILAP CHANDRA, J.—This writ petition has been filed under Article 226, Constitution of India praying that the respondent be directed to grant Special Pay to the employees of the Rajasthan High Court with effect from April 1st, 19c 5 and the amendment made in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1983 (hereinafter to be called as the Rules) be made applicable with retrospective effect from April 1st, 1985. The facts of the case may be summarised thus; 2. Prior to and after promulgation of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1961, the employees of the Rajasthan High Court. Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Public Service Commission and Governors Secretariat were granted Special Pay. Thereafter, it was merged in the subsequent revised pay scales. The Government of Rajasthan amended Rules w. e. f. April 1, 1985, granting Special Pay to the employees of the Government Secretariat vide Notification No F. 17(77)FD(Gr. 2)/82-II dated March 29, 1985 (Annexure 1) to the Writ Petition. Subsequently, the employees posted in the Governors Secretariat and Rajasthan Public Service Commission were given Special Pay with effect from April, 1985 vide Notification No. F. 17 (77)FD(Gr. 2)/82-IV dated December 3, 1985 and the employees of Rajasthan High Court were granted Special Pay w. e. f. April 1, 1987 vide Notification No. F. 17 (77) FD (Gr. 2V82-Pt. IV dated June 27, 1987 (Annexure 4). 3. The case of the petitioner is that the action of the Government is not granting Special Pay to the High Court employees w. e. f. April 1, 1985 and granting it w. e. f. April 1, 1987 is most arbitrary and discriminatory. There is no reason or rationale in granting Special Pay to the employees of the High Court from a subsequent date. With the prior approval of the Governor of Rajasthan, Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1953 were amended and the posts shown in their Schedule II have been equated with the posts in the Govt. Secretariat and the pay scales applicable to the equivalent Secretariat posts and orders regarding fixation in such pay scales issued from time to time have been made applicable to the corresponding High Court Posts. 4. In reply, the Government of Rajasthan has said that the consideration for the grant of Special Pay is entirely different from that of revision of pay scales. 4. In reply, the Government of Rajasthan has said that the consideration for the grant of Special Pay is entirely different from that of revision of pay scales. it is granted keeping in view the resource position of the State, the guidelines contained in Rule 7(31) of the Rajasthan Service Rules and it cannot be claimed as a matter of right on the plea that a post having similar nomenclature in nature of office carries Special Pay. Only six categories of posts in the Government Secretariat were granted Special Pay vide Notification (Annexure 1) and by subsequent Notification (Annexure R-l). Special Pay was granted to other posts w. e. f. October 1, 1986 and April 1, 1987 vide Notification No. F. 17(77)FD (Gr. 2)/82-Pt. IV dated October 30, 1986. Special Pay to the employees of the Governors Secretariat and Rajasthan Public Service Commission was granted w. e. f. April 1, 1985 as the decision was taken in the year 1985 itself. No discrimination has been made in granting Special Pay to the High Court employees alongwith other categories of posts w.e.f. 1.4.1987, the action of the Government is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory and the writ petition is not maintainable. 5. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Government of Rajasthan granted Special Pay to the employees of the Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Public Service Commission and Governors Secretariat w. e. f. April 1, 1985 and to the employees of the Rajasthan High Court we.f. April 1, 1987 without any reason or rhyme, this action of the Government is most arbitrary and discriminatory, there exists no basis for this discrimination and hits the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. He also contended that previously the Government of Rajasthan granted Special Pay to the employees of the High Court from the same date the employees of the Secretariat were given and the Rules were accordingly amended vide letter No. B. 1194/F-18(7) JudJ/53 dated July 11, 1979. He relied upon S, K. Ghosh v. State of Rajasthan ( ), D. S. Nakara v. Union of India, (2), Union of India v. Bidhubhushan Malik. (3), H. L, Vijn v. Union of India, (4), Shri Harkant Hiralal Vohra v. Union of India (5) and Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana (6). 6. He relied upon S, K. Ghosh v. State of Rajasthan ( ), D. S. Nakara v. Union of India, (2), Union of India v. Bidhubhushan Malik. (3), H. L, Vijn v. Union of India, (4), Shri Harkant Hiralal Vohra v. Union of India (5) and Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana (6). 6. In reply, the learned Deputy Government Advocate contended that Special Pay cannot be claimed as of right and certain categories of posts in the Secretariat itself have been granted Special Pay w. e. f. October 1, 1986 and April 1, 1987, the action of the Government is not discriminatory and the writ petition is not maintainable. 7. Admittedly, Special Pay has been granted to all posts of the Rajasthan High Court with effect from April 1, 1987 vide Annexure 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Special Pay has not been granted with effect from April 1, 1985 as has been granted to the equivalent posts of the Government Secretariat. The question for consideration in this case is whether there was no rationale for not granting Special Pay with effect from April 1, 1985 and this action of the Government violated the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution. 8. It is not the case of the Government of Rajasthan that the nature of the duties of the posts to which the Special Pay has been granted became specially arduous or some additional work or responsibility was entrusted to these posts with effect from April 1, 1987 only and not prior to it and, therefore, the special pay was granted with effect from April 1, 1987. It is also not disputed that the posts of the High Court mentioned in Schedule-II of the Rajasthan High Court (Conditions of Service of the Staff) Rules, 1953 have been equated with the corresponding posts in the Government Secretariat as shown in it. Two reasons have been given in the reply for not granting special pay to the employees of the Rajasthan High Court with effect from April 1, 1985 and for granting it with effect from April 1, 1987. Firstly, the resource position of the State permitted to do so. Secondly, the matter regarding special pay to the posts of the High Court was considered in the year 1987. 9. Firstly, the resource position of the State permitted to do so. Secondly, the matter regarding special pay to the posts of the High Court was considered in the year 1987. 9. Now it is to be seen whether due to the resource position of the State, the Government was justified in granting the special pay to the posts of the High Court with effect from April 1, 1987 which have corresponding equivalent posts in the Government Secretariat. We do not find any justification for this discrimination on the said ground for the following reasons; (1) Neither any material has been brought on the record nor necessary facts and figures have been given in reply, in support of this ground. On the contrary, the High Court surrendered over rupees one lakh and two lakh during the years 1985-86 and 1986-87 from the amounts of senctioned budget. (2) Special Pay was granted in December, 1985 to the staff of Governor Secretariat and Rajasthan Public Service Commission with effect from April 1, 1985 vide Notification dated 3-12-85. Remaining six posts of Rajasthan Public Service Commission and seventeen posts of Governors Secretariat were granted special pay with effect from 1-10-1986 vide Notification dated 26-6-1987. Similarly, twenty seven posts of Government Secretariat were granted special pay with effect from 1-10-1986 vide notification dated 20-10-86 (Annexure B/l) Special Pay to all these posts were not granted w. e f. April 1, 1987. (3) The payment of Special Pay for two years i.e. with effect from 1.4.85 would not have required much funds. It could be made from the said savings. 10. The second ground is that the matter was considered in the year 1987. This is factually not correct. It is clear from the letter No. F. 20 (8) Judicial/85 dated 14-2-86 (Annexure-3) that the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur sent letter No. 1/A (iii) (a) 17/85/5477 dated 6-12-85. This leaves no doubt that the matter regarding special pay started receiving consideration of the Govt of Rajasthan in the year 1985 and was duly considered in the year 1986. It is clear from the letter No. F. 20 (8) Judicial/85 dated 14-2-86 (Annexure-3) that the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur sent letter No. 1/A (iii) (a) 17/85/5477 dated 6-12-85. This leaves no doubt that the matter regarding special pay started receiving consideration of the Govt of Rajasthan in the year 1985 and was duly considered in the year 1986. In the end of the para No. 9 of the reply, it is stated "the matter in regard to grant of Special Pay to posts in the Rajasthan High Court was considered in the year 1987 and it was decided to be granted with other categories of posts with effect from 1.4.1987." It is thus clear from it that the State of Rajasthan has treated different posts equally and equivalent posts differently for the purpose of grant of special pay. It has been observed in the famous ease of D.S. Nakara v.. Union of India, (Supra) as follows:— "Proceeding further, this court observed that where all relevant considerations are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of their pay merely because they belong to different department." 11. It has further been observed in para 53 as follows :- "The Court held that the Central Government cannot pick out a date from a hat and that is what it seems to have done in saying that a period prior to that date would not be deemed to be approved by the Central Government within the second proviso. In case before us, the eligibility criteria for being eligible for liberalised pension scheme has been picked out from where it is difficult to gather and no rationale is discernible nor one was attempted at the hearing. The ratio of the decision would squarely apply to the facts of this case." 12. It has been observed in H.L. Vijn v. Union of India (Supra) as follows:- "......In our view just as the Executive has its own Secretariat, the Judiciary as its own Secretariat and its Secretariat is the High Court staff. It appears to us that there can be no reason for denying the same facilities of Special pay and like to the Secretariat of the Judiciary namely the High Court staff as are available to the Secretariate of the Executive, more so as the sovereignty is reflected in three equal instrumentalities the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. It appears to us that there can be no reason for denying the same facilities of Special pay and like to the Secretariat of the Judiciary namely the High Court staff as are available to the Secretariate of the Executive, more so as the sovereignty is reflected in three equal instrumentalities the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. As a matter of fact long time back the High-Court Arrears Committee presided by a former Chief Justice of India has this to say: "We are told that the emoluments of officers and staff of the High Courts are in many States much lower than the emoluments of the Secretariat staff performing even comparable functions. The work of the staff of the High Court is often specialised and more complex than that of the Secretariat staff. We recommend that the least that should be done for the staff of the High Court is to bring their scales of pay and allowances on par with the scales prevailing in the State Secretariat..." 13. It may be mentioned here that on earlier occasion also, special pay to the Class IV servants of the High Court was granted with effect from the date from which the Class IV staff of the Govt. Secretariat and Rajasthan Public Service Commission was granted and relevant notification was amended accordingly. Letter No. D. 1194/f. 18(7) Jud/53 dated July 11, 1959 of the Government of Rajasthan in the Law & Judicial Department runs as under:- "In partial modification of this Department letter No. 771 F. 18(7) Jud. /53 dated 15th October, 1958, I am directed to convey further sanction of the Governor that the words and figures " with retrospective effect from the 1st April 1950" will be substituted for the words and figures "with effect from the 1st April, 1956" in the fifth and six lines of the letter referred to above. The Governor has been pleased to take the present decision as a special case because it had turned out that when the unified pay scales were sanctioned for the staff of the High Court has noticed that the Class IV staff of the Public Service Commission had been treated in the matter of special pay at-par with Class IV staff of the Government Secretariat. There was no justification for according a different treatment in respect of the Class IV staff of the High Court. 14. There was no justification for according a different treatment in respect of the Class IV staff of the High Court. 14. Recently, in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2012 of 1987, Ghanshyam Charan v. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and State of Rajasthan, (9) this Court has observed in its judgment dated 4-12-1987, as follows:- "......When the Rajasthan Civil Services (New Pay Scale) Rules, 1969 came in force, the pay scale of the Librarians was fixed at Rs. 375-850. By Notification Annexure-4 dated December 7, 1971, this pay scale was allowed to the Librarians of the Government Secretariat from January 1, 1970. But this pay scale was allowed to the Librarian of the Rajasthan High Court from April, 1 1971. We fail to understand as to what prevailed over the State Government to allow the aforesaid pay scale to the Librarian of the Govern-ment Secretariat with effect from January 1, 1970 and to allow the same to the Librarian of the High Court with effect from April 1, 1971. It is an apparent discrimination when both the services stand at par and equal pay scales have been granted to them in the past. There appears no logic or reasoning behind this discrimination shown by the State Government." 15. It is correct that certain employees of the Government Secretariat have been granted special pay with effect from 1-10-86 and 1-4-87 vide Annexure B/l and Annexure 4 respectively. Except the posts of Librarian, Deputy Libraian, Driver, Senior Accounts Officer, Accounts Officer, Accountant, Junior Accountant, there are no other posts in the High Court which are mentioned in these two annextures. Thus there exists no justification for not granting special pay with effect from April 1, 1985, to the posts of the High Court except the aforesaid posts. As such the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 16. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent is directed to grant Special Pay to the posts of the Rajasthan High Court with effect from 1-4-1985 except to the posts whose equivalent posts in the Secretariat have been granted from subsequent dates. These aforesaid posts of the Rajasthan High Court shall be granted special pay with effect from the same date from which their equivalent posts in the Secretariat have been granted. 17. These aforesaid posts of the Rajasthan High Court shall be granted special pay with effect from the same date from which their equivalent posts in the Secretariat have been granted. 17. Necessary orders will be issued by the Government of Rajasthan, in the Department of Finance, within three months from today. There will be no order as to costs.