Judgment Honble Mr. Justice A.L. Vaidya, J (Retd.), Chairman-The case of the applicant as pleaded has been that she was appointed as Nursery Teacher on October 20, 1972 as per Annexure A-l. She was given initial start of Rs. 125/- p.m. in the pay scale of Rs. 125-300. According to the applicant, as per Annexure A-2, she was directed to be fixed at Rs. 125/-p.m. (fixed) till further orders. It has also been pleaded that the applicant was being paid Rs. 125/- p.m. fixed till December, 1977 when as on January 1, 1978, she was being paid Rs. 480/ p.m. fixed whereas running scale since January 1, 1978 for Nursery Teachers was Rs. 480-880. According to the applicant, she had passed Kindergarten Training Course Examination held by Punjab Education Department in April, 1971. Annexure A-3 is the Certificate in that regard. According to her, she was a student of Avalon Girls Higher Secondary School and Training Centre, Pathankot, and had undertaken the course for two years. Annexure A-4 was the Certificate. The applicant has prayed for running scale since she joined the job. The applicant prayed that she be held entitled to regular pay scales of a Nursery Teacher from the date of her initial appointment and the respondents may be directed to pay the same. It has also been prayed that the increments becoming due and payable to the applicant from time to time may be allowed to the applicant and the respondents be directed to place the applicant at the appropriate stage in the existing pay scale of the Nursery Teachers. She also prayed for the arrears alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. 2. According to the applicant, the Nursery Course she had undergone, in case was not recognised by the Himachal Government, in that event, the applicant be declared to be entitled to regular pay scale of the Nursery Teacher by virtue of her long and un-interrupted service of about 16 years. 3. The application has been resisted on behalf of the Government. 4. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the pleadings have been scrutinised. 5. In order to appreciate the case of the applicant, there are certain facts which have not been disputed. 6. It is not being disputed that the applicant was appointed after she had appeared before the Selection Committee as a Nursery Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 5. In order to appreciate the case of the applicant, there are certain facts which have not been disputed. 6. It is not being disputed that the applicant was appointed after she had appeared before the Selection Committee as a Nursery Teacher in the pay scale of Rs. 125-5-250/10-300 with initial start of Rs. 125/- p.m. and at that time, she was having a certificate of passing Kindergarten Course examination held in April, 1971. The appointment letter is of dated October 31, 1972. It is also not disputed that the applicant was given fixed salary of Rs. 480/- when Grade was revised since January 1,1978 for Nursery Teachers and the Grade was Rs. 480-880/-. 7. The Certificate of the applicant has not been recognised as yet. 8. The State in its reply-affidavit has stated that the applicant was paid at Rs. 125/- (fixed) initial of the scale of Rs. 125-300 till December 31, 1977 on revision of scales w.e.f. January 1, 1978 she was paid at Rs. 480/ -(fixed) which was the initial of the scale of Rs. 480-800. It has also been stated that from January 1, 1986, she was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2100 at Rs. 1200 fixed. It has further been stated in the reply-affidavit that the matter regarding the grant of running scale of the applicant was linked with the framing of Recruitment and promotion Rules and after the formation of Recruitment and Promotion Rules, the Government had granted the pay scale to all such Nursery Teachers as were appointed on these posts at the fixed pay they had all been allowed the same w.e.f. April 1, 1990. It has also been stated in the reply-affidavit that the applicant too had been allowed the same as per entries made in her service Book inspite of the fact that the training undergone by the applicant was not recognised for appointment as Nursery Teacher. 9. That means, the State has granted the pay scale to all the Nursery Teachers including the applicant w.e.f. April 1, 1990 though the training undergone by the applicant was not recognised. 10. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the applicant has been granted the running Scale since April 1, 1990 though the Certificate was still not recognised. This position existed even at the time of her initial appointment. 10. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the applicant has been granted the running Scale since April 1, 1990 though the Certificate was still not recognised. This position existed even at the time of her initial appointment. The work being taken from the applicant since her appointment till she was granted a regular scale was of the same nature and on the basis of the same qualifications. If it was so, she could have been granted the regular scale since her original appointment. Moreover, the applicant has been putting the same work which was taken from those Teachers whose Certificated1hac been recognised. This aspect is not being disputed. In this view of the matter also, the applicant was entitled for the same pay which was granted to the other Nursery Teachers whose Certificates had been recognised. 11. The aforesaid facts revealed from the pleadings of the parties, if taken into consideration, the relief asked for by the applicant has to be favourably considered. 12. In view of the foregoing reasons, the applicant shall be entitled for pay in the running scale since she was at first appointed in the year 1972 and she would be entitled for such a running scale as and when the scales have been revised. 13. At this point, it may be pointed out that so far as asking for scale is concerned, the cause of action being a continuous one, it can be granted in favour of the applicant. But, however, so far as the arrears were concerned on the basis of limitation, she would be entitled for three years only. 14. In view of the above discussions, the present application is partly accepted and as a consequence thereof, the applicant is entitled to draw the pay in the regular pay scale since she was initially appointed. However, she will be entitled to draw the arrears due to her for a period of three years only when the present application was preferred. Thus, the arrears are to be calculated on the basis of scale allowed to the applicant as referred to above. With these observations, the application stands disposed of.