JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has been filed for directing the respondents to fix the petitioner's salary as Motor Vehicle Inspector in the pay scale 640-1180 (No. 12) with effect from September 1, 1981 and accordingly in the subsequent revised pay scales and to pay the arrears with interest @ 18% p.a. In the alternative, it has been prayed that the two scales i.e. No. 10 and 12 provided for Motor Vehicle Inspector in Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1983, 1987 and 1989 be declared illegal and it may be declared that all the Motor Vehicle Inspectors are entitled for higher pay scale No. 12. 2. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as a lower division clerk in the Transport Department of the Government of Rajasthan in the year 1952. In the year 1966, he was promoted to the post of Motor Vehicles Sub-Inspector. In the year 1975 he obtained certificate (Annexure 1) from the Industrial Training Institute, Ajmer in the trade of motor mechanic. In February, 1975, he was promoted to the post of Motor Vehicles Inspector. Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1983 were promulgated with effect from September 1, 1981. In them, two pay scales were provided for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector viz., 640-1180 (No. 12) and 610-1090 (No. 10). The petitioner's pay was fixed in the pay-scale of Rs. 610-1090 (No. 10) and not in Rs. 640-1180 (No. 12). The pay-scale Rules were subsequently revised in the years 1987 and 1989. On account of fixation of his pay in the pay scale No. 10, his pay was fixed at lower amounts in the subsequent revised pay scales. He has retired from the service with effect from June 30, 1988. 3. In reply, it has been averred by the respondents that the petitioner was not possessing the required qualification as provided under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised pay scales) Rules, 1983 and, therefore, he was not granted pay scale No.12. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was possessing the minimum experience and qualification required for his promotion from the post of Motor Vehicle Sub-Inspector to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector and as such he was entitled for pay scale No. 12. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was possessing the minimum experience and qualification required for his promotion from the post of Motor Vehicle Sub-Inspector to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector and as such he was entitled for pay scale No. 12. He further contended that there was no justification for providing two pay scales for the Motor Vehicle Inspectors when the same work was being done by all the Motor Vehicle Inspectors and different pay scales on the basis of qualification is illegal and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 39(d), Constitution of India. He lastly contended that on account of fixation of petitioner's salary in the pay scale No. 10 with effect from September 1, 1981, the petitioner had suffered great monetary loss and he is, therefore, entitled to get the arrears with interest @ 18% per annum. He relied upon the decisions given in D.B. Civil Special Appeal Nos. 157/79 - State v. Mani Ram , S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3129/84 - Daulat Raj v. State of Rajasthan and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1725/75 - Mani Ram v. State of Rajasthan. 5. In reply, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner was not possessing the requisite qualification required for the fixation in the pay scale of Rs. 640-1180 (No. 12). 6. Entry No. 2 of the Schedule of Rajasthan Transport Subordinate Service Rules, 1963 relating to the Motor Vehicles Inspectors runs as under:- Name of Post Source of recruitment with percentage Qualification for direct recruitment Post from which appointment by promotion is to made Minimum Experience and qualification required for promotion. Motor Vehicles Inspector 66⅔% by promotion and 33⅓% by direct recruitment Higher Secondary with Polytechnic Diploma in Automobile Engineering or in Mechanical Engineering Motor Vehicles Sub-Inspectors (1) Matric with 5 years' service as Vehicles Sub-Inspector in the Department and ITI Certificate in Automobile Engineering or passing of Departmental Examination after completing course in Automobile Engineering prescribed by the Director of Transport & (ii) In case of Non-Matriculate Motor Vehicles Sub-Inspector in the Department & passing of Departmental Examination after completing course in Automobile Engineering prescribed by the Director of Transports. 7. 7. Relevant portions of the Rajasthan (Revised) Pay Scale Rules, 1983 relating to Motor Vehicles Inspector run as under:- Old Scale New Scale Motor Vehicle Inspector 470-830 640-1180 (12) For those who possess requisite qualifications prescribed under the relevant recruitment rules. 440-770 610-1090 (10) For those who do not possess the requisite qualification prescribed under the relevant recruitment rules." 8. It is the admitted case of the parties that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Motor Vehicles Sub-Inspector in the year 1966 from the post of lower division clerk, he was promoted as Motor Vehicles Inspector in February, 1975 and the same year he had obtained certificate from the Industrial Training Institution, Ajmer in the trade of Motor Mechanic vide Annexure 1. The petitioner stated in para No. 11 of the writ petition that he was matriculate. It has been denied by the respondents in their reply. The petitioner could not produce any material to prove that he had passed matriculation examination despite giving opportunities. As such the above quoted clause (ii) was applicable in the case of the petitioner and not clause (i) of the said Service Rules, 1963. It is not the case of the petitioner that he has passed Departmental Examination after completing Course in Automobile Engineering prescribed by the Director of Transport. Thus the qualification set out in clause (ii) was also not possessed by him. As a matter of fact, the writ petition is based on the qualification and experience set out in clause (i) and not clause (ii). As such his fixation of pay in the pay scale of Rs. 610-1090 (No. 10) with effect from September 1, 1981 was correct. 9. As regards the second contention, it would be enough to refer the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court given in V. Markendeye v. State of A.P., AIR 1989 SC 1308 . In paras No. 10 and 14, it has been observed as follows:- "Different grades are laid down in service with varying qualification for entry into particular grade. Higher qualification and experience based on length of service are valid considerations for prescribing different pay scales for different cadres. The application of doctrine arises where employees are equal in every respect, in educational qualifications, duties, functions and measure of responsibilities and yet they are denied equality in pay. Higher qualification and experience based on length of service are valid considerations for prescribing different pay scales for different cadres. The application of doctrine arises where employees are equal in every respect, in educational qualifications, duties, functions and measure of responsibilities and yet they are denied equality in pay. If the classification for prescribing different scales of pay is founded on reasonable nexus the principle will not apply." "In the instant case the graduate overseers have all along been treated separate entity from the non-graduate supervisors and they have been drawing different pay since long. The Constitution Bench has already recorded findings that two sets of officers, namely, graduate Supervisors and non-graduate Supervisors do not belong to the same class of service and unequal treatment relating to promotion is justified on the basis of educational qualification. Therefore, the classification made between the graduate Supervisors and non-graduate Supervisors is reasonable and the State Government did not violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution in prescribing different scales of pay for them." On the face of this decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the cases referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be followed. The two pay scales i.e. No. 10 and 12 for the Motor Vehicles Inspectors are based on the different qualification and experience. As such they are quite valid. Thus there is no force in the writ petition. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.Petition dismissed. *******