JUDGMENT 1. 1. The petitioner has approached this court seeking quashing of the order dated 24.2.1981 passed by the learned Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur with a further direction to step up his pay to be brought at par with that of his juniors from the date of their promotions as Deputy Registrars and Joint Registrars. 2. This court vide judgment dated 30.1.1996 dismissed the instant writ petition but this court (Hon'ble A.K. Parihar, J) vide order dated July 16, 1999 recalled the earlier judgment on the ground that as the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on January 30, 1996 pleaded no instructions. 3. I have reflected over the rival submissions and carefully scanned the material on record. 4. Learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment observed that the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of stepping up of his pay and proper course for him was to have claimed retrospective promotion vis-a-vis his juniors, according to law. Vide judgment dated February 26, 1980 Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal directed the State Government to promote the petitioner to the post of Joint Registrar with effect from the date his juniors were promoted and give him all the consequential benefits of that post. 5. In University of Jodhpur vs. Dr. C.M. Joshi (D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 127/94 decided on December 11, 1995) , this court indicated thus : "The doctrine of justice and fair play requires that the person, who is higher in merit or the seniority does not draw less salary. Status of the senior or more meritorious candidate in the matter of fixation of emoluments vis-a-vis person who is placed on lower merit or seniority in the same scale is required to be safeguarded. It would be quite unfair to fix him in a lower pay slab than that of lower meritorious and junior candidate." 6. In my considered opinion, the act of non-petitioners in providing higher salary/emoluments to person junior to the petitioner is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as well as Rule 26A and 32 of Rajasthan Service Rules. 7. Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed. The impugned order dated 24th February, 1981 stands set aside. In my considered opinion, the act of non-petitioners in providing higher salary/emoluments to person junior to the petitioner is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as well as Rule 26A and 32 of Rajasthan Service Rules. 7. Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed. The impugned order dated 24th February, 1981 stands set aside. The respondents are directed to step up the salary of the petitioner from the date when his juniors were treated to have been promoted as Joint Registrars and to pay appears of salary and also give annual grade increment and interest on the amount due with all consequential benefits.Costs easy.Petition Allowed *******