( 1 ) SINCE all these writ appeals are directed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge and the questions of fact and that of law that arise for decision making are also common, these appeals were clubbed, heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. Writ appeals 1004 and 1497 of 2001 are preferred by the Management of Hatti Gold Mines Company Limited whereas. Writ Appeals 5783 and 5784 of 2000 are preferred by the Association of the Officers and employees concerned. ( 2 ) THE background facts leading to the filing of the writ petition be noted first and they are as follows: The first writ petitioner is a registered Association of the officers employed in the Copper Unit of Hatti Gold Mines. The second writ petitioner was working as Chief Metallurgist in the Copper Unit in Hatti Gold Mines Company on the date of filing the writ petitions. The petitioners filed writ petition 14293 and 14294 of 1996 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing the seniority list prepared by the management vide Annexure-D and for mandamus to the management to prepare a seniority list de novo after giving opportunity to the employees of the Copper Unit and treating the employees of the Copper Unit and the Gold Unit as one. The petitioners have also sought mandamus to direct the management to extend the parity of benefit of - pay scales to the Officers of the Copper Unit. ( 3 ) THE above reliefs were sought by contending that the Officers and employees of the erstwhile Copper Unit by virtue of the Government Order dated 12. 07. 1985 became the employees of the management of Hatti Gold Mines and their services were merged with the services of Hatti Gold Mines and after the merger of the service. they had been performing same duties and functions in the respective cadres. The petitioners contended that the pay scales extended and the seniority list prepared by the management would violate the postulates of article 14 and also the mandate of article 21 of the Constitution of India. they had been performing same duties and functions in the respective cadres. The petitioners contended that the pay scales extended and the seniority list prepared by the management would violate the postulates of article 14 and also the mandate of article 21 of the Constitution of India. ( 4 ) THE Writ Petition was opposed by the management of Hatti Gold Mines by contending that though there was amalgamation of the employees of the defunct Copper Unit, there was no merger of their service with the service of the Gold Unit and that the claim made by the writ petitioners on the strength of clause-9 of the Government Order is of no help to them because that clause only provides that after the merger of the service, the terms and conditions of the service they enjoyed before the merger should not be impaired or taken away unilaterally by the management and since that is not the case of the writ petitioners, granting reliefs would not arise. In substance, what is pleaded by the management in the statement of objection is that even after the merger in the year 1985 the employees of the erstwhile Copper Unit have been kept separately to serve only in the Copper Unit and, therefore, they should be treated as employees belonging to different class or category. ( 5 ) LEARNED Single judge, in the premise of the pleadings of the parties and on appreciation of documents laid before him, found that the management was guilty of practicing invidious discrimination in the matter of fixing the pay scales. Having opined thus but on appreciating the financial difficulties pleaded by the management, Learned Judge issued mandamus to extend parity of pay scales to the writ petitioners only with effect from 01. 04. 1916. With regard to the claim of the writ petitioners for preparation of the seniority list de novo, learned judge permitted the writ petitioners to submit their representations with regard to the seniority list - Annexure-D and directed the management to consider the representation and to pass appropriate orders. Writ petitioners not being satisfied with the relief granted by the learned single judge in part are before us. The management too being aggrieved by the partial relief anted by the teamed single judge is before us. Writ petitioners not being satisfied with the relief granted by the learned single judge in part are before us. The management too being aggrieved by the partial relief anted by the teamed single judge is before us. ( 6 ) WE have heard Sri K. Subba Rao, learned senior Counsel for the writ petitioners and Sri Ravi, learned counsel for the management. Sri Subba Rao would contend that after the merger by virtue of the Government Order dated 16. 01. 1991, the employees of the defunct Copper Unit became the employees of the Gold Unit and all of them together constituted a well-defined class in each of the cadres concerned for the purpose of article 14 of the Constitution and therefore, the management is under an obligation to treat all the employees as a class and it cannot practise invidious discrimination. Sri Subba Rao having taken us through the pleadings and the documents placed before the Court would highlight that the management's action in the matter of fixation of pay scales and extending the same to different classes of employees and preparation of the seniority list on the basis of such pay scales is ex facie arbitrary, unreasonable and it does not base on any rational norms or cadre regulation rules. Sri Ravi learned Counsel for the management per contra would draw our attention to the pathetic background situation that obtained in the Copper Unit before the GOI issued notification on 12. 07. 1985 in the public interest to merle the Copper Unit with the Gold Unit, and submit that even after the merger in year 1985, all those employees who worked In the Copper Unit were retained in the same unit and their services were not utilized in the Gold Unit before the year 1996. Sri Ravi would point out that in the year 1996 the management having noticed that the Copper Unit became seriously sick and it was not economically feasible to continue the Copper Unit. on an experimental basis used that unit for mining gold. but, the management realised soon that that venture was also not economically feasible. In the circumstance, the management proposed closure of Gold Unit at Chitradurga, but, Government of India directed the management to frame a Voluntary Retirement Scheme in the interest of the employees and accordingly, a Voluntary Retirement Scheme. 2001 was framed. but, the management realised soon that that venture was also not economically feasible. In the circumstance, the management proposed closure of Gold Unit at Chitradurga, but, Government of India directed the management to frame a Voluntary Retirement Scheme in the interest of the employees and accordingly, a Voluntary Retirement Scheme. 2001 was framed. Sri Ravi would point out that all the officers and employees including the writ petitioners voluntarily retired under the Scheme. Sri Ravi would contend that under no circumstance, extending similar pay scales or treating on par with the employees of the Gold Unit before 1996 would arise because till then, the employees of the Copper Unit and Gold Unit were considered as separate classes and their terms and conditions were worked out differently under the Cadre and Recruitment Rules. ( 7 ) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties, the only point that arises for decision, is whether the writ petitioners are entitled to the relief as sought in the writ petitions in its entirety. It is an admitted position that before the merger of the Copper Unit with the Gold Unit in the year 1985, the employees of the Copper Unit and the Gold Unit were governed by different cadre and recruitment rules. Clause-9 of the Government Order dated 12. 07. 1985 provides" Provisions respecting existing Officers and. Employees of the dissolved Companies: - Every whole time Officer or other employee (other than the Managing Director and Deputy Managing Director) employed immediately before the appointed day in the dissolved companies shall as from the appointed day become an officer or employee as the case may be, of HGML and shall hold his office or service therein by the same tenure and upon the same terms and conditions as he would have under the dissolved companies if this order had not been made, and shall continue to do so unless and until his employment in HGML is duly terminated or until his remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment are duly altered by HGML by mutual consent. " ( 8 ) EVEN according to the management by virtue of the Government Order, the employees of the Copper Unit became the employees of the company by way of amalgamation. But, the management would contend that by virtue of clause 9, it could not be said that there was integration of the two services. " ( 8 ) EVEN according to the management by virtue of the Government Order, the employees of the Copper Unit became the employees of the company by way of amalgamation. But, the management would contend that by virtue of clause 9, it could not be said that there was integration of the two services. It was so claimed by the management placing reliance heavily on the tatter part of clause-9 which provides that the employees and the officers of the Copper Unit would serve the company in the same office or post with the same tenure and subject to the same terms and conditions of the dissolved Company, if the order has not been made by the Government of India. Having said it as above, clause-9 proceeds to state that that arrangement or situation win continue to exist until and unless their employment in the company is terminated or their remuneration and other terms and conditions of the employees are duly altered by the Company by mutual consent. ( 9 ) IT is bite that fundamental rights cannot be waived. We thought it appropriate to state the above well-settled principle at the threshold, because. if we could ultimately find that any of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the writ petitioners is/are found to have been violated by the action of the management, the management could not sustain the action on the, ground that the employees of the Copper Unit have agreed in terms of clause-9 that they could seek better advantages, benefits, pecuniary and otherwise, on and above or in addition to what was assured to them in terms of Cadre and Recruitment Rules which governed their employment before the amalgamation, only with the consent of the management and not otherwise. In our considered opinion, what is assured in clause-9 is that the management under no circumstance can alter the terms and conditions of services of the employees of the Copper Unit to which they were entitled before the amalgamation without their consent. It does not mean that the employees after the merger cannot claim better right if they are entitled to claim such right. ( 10 ) WE have carefully perused the averments in the writ affidavit and additional writ affidavit. It does not mean that the employees after the merger cannot claim better right if they are entitled to claim such right. ( 10 ) WE have carefully perused the averments in the writ affidavit and additional writ affidavit. It is the precise case of the writ petitioners that after the merger of their service in the year 1985 they have been discharging similar functions and duties in the respective cadres; there are large number of instances where the employees of the Copper Unit have been transferred to Gold Unit to serve in the corresponding cadres. The above basic fact pleaded in the affidavit is not seriously contested, though it was vaguely stated in the statement of objections that the Qualifications prescribed for the posts under the Cadre and Recruitment Rules for the employees of the Copper Unit and Gold Unit employees in corresponding various cadres are different and therefore, they cannot claim similar treatment. That plea of the management does not seem to be correct. The writ petitioners at page-96 have produced a document marked as Annexure-G with title Pay revision of Officers of Copper Unit in comparison with the Hutti Gold Mines Co. Ltd. dated 19. 05. 1988". The petitioners have also produced a copy of the covering letter of the management to the Secretary of the First Petitioner Association dated 19th May. 1988 enclosing Annexure-G. As could be seen from that letter the Management proposed revision of pay scales for the officers of Copper Unit in the cadres of Junior Officers. Senior Officers. Deputy Chiefs, Chief Officers. Mines Managers. Assistant General Manager/financial Controller and General Managers. As could be seen from Annexure-G appended to that letter, the Management proposed revision of pay scales in the above 7 cadres of the Copper Unit and they are set out against the proposed revision of pay scales in the corresponding cadres in the Gold Unit. Having compared the scales of pay proposed for the above 7 cadres in the Copper Unit and Gold Unit, we are satisfied that the management is undeniably guilty of practicing invidious discrimination in framing pay scales. Annexure-G also falsifies the contention advanced on behalf of the management that the educational Qualifications and technical qualifications prescribed for the officers of the Gold Unit in the above 7 cadres are of higher degree or Quality. Annexure-G also falsifies the contention advanced on behalf of the management that the educational Qualifications and technical qualifications prescribed for the officers of the Gold Unit in the above 7 cadres are of higher degree or Quality. ( 11 ) WE are told that the revisions proposed vide letter dated 19th May 1998 was ultimately done and different pay scales as indicated in Annexure-G were extended to the Officers of the Gold Unit and Copper Unit. In addition, we also find from Annexure-H, that even in the matter of providing perks to the Officers of the Gold Unit and Copper Unit, discernible invidious discrimination was practised by the Management. Annexure-H produced by the Writ Petitioners is a. chart of perks admissible for Officers of Gold Unit and Copper Unit. Although Sri Ravi, in the course of the argument, would contend that since the writ petitioners served in the Copper Unit even after the merger in the year 1985 and accepted all those terms and conditions of service in terms of Cadre and Recruitment Rules which governed their employment before the merger for nearly 11 years without any demur and protest, they are not entitled to make any grievance, particularly after they cease to be employees of the Company by virtue of voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme. This submission does not seem to be correct. Annexure-G itself indicates that even before 19th May, 1998, the Association of the Officers lodged their grievance with regard to the different pay scales extended to the Officers of the Gold Unit and Copper Unit and that was the reason why the management addressed the above noticed letter dated 19th May, 1998 to the Secretary of the Association of the Officers. ( 12 ) THE materials placed before the Court would establish the following facts: (i) after amalgamation of the two units, the services of the employees of the Copper Unit were integrated with the services of the Gold Unit. ( 12 ) THE materials placed before the Court would establish the following facts: (i) after amalgamation of the two units, the services of the employees of the Copper Unit were integrated with the services of the Gold Unit. We do not find any substance in the contention of the management that despite the Government Order 1985, the service of the Copper Unit was not integrated with the service of the Gold Unit and that the employees of the Copper Unit continued to serve only the Copper Unit; (ii) after the amalgamation of both the services, the personnel belonging to the two services have been made to serve both the Units by transfer or otherwise; (iii) as far back as in the year 1988 and even earlier, the employees of the erstwhile Copper Unit had been making grievance with regard to the pay scales and seniority; (iv) even in the year 1996 when Chitradurga Copper Unit was converted into a Gold Unit, it is not the case of the management that the personnel in the Copper Unit were trained to undertake the job of extracting Gold by mining; (v) the duties and functions discharged by the personnel belonging to the Copper Unit and the Gold Unit, in substance, are similar in all material aspects. ( 13 ) IN tile premise of these established facts, we have no good reason to reject the contention of Sri Subba Rao. 'likes should be treated alike' is the Constitutional creed flowing from Article 14. It is true that the doctrine, 'equal pay for equal work' is not a pedantic doctrine to be applied blindly on hypothetical basis. But, the facts; laid before the Court would not leave any doubt in the mind of the Court that the writ petitioners and the officers employees working in the Gold Unit in the corresponding cadres belong to the same class. Therefore, the Court is bound to extend the pay-scales and other benefits on par with the officer employees of the Gold Unit. Satisfactory materials are placed before the Court that after the amalgamation, there was integration of the two services of the personnel in the Copper and Gold Unit and they have been made to work in the posts and cadres in both the Units. Satisfactory materials are placed before the Court that after the amalgamation, there was integration of the two services of the personnel in the Copper and Gold Unit and they have been made to work in the posts and cadres in both the Units. ( 14 ) THEREFORE, all of them should be regarded as persons belonging to a. well-defined class' for the purpose of Article 14 of the Constitution. Learned judge has granted the relief of parity of pay scales to the writ petitioners only with effect from 01. 04. 1996. It is well settled that if the Court finds invidious discrimination in the State action, the Court is bound to grant the relief to the writ applicant and, the financial difficulty pleaded or proved by the respondent can never be a legitimate ground to deny the right to the applicant. ( 15 ) ALTHOUGH it is our considered opinion that the preparation of the seniority list purely on the basis of the pay scales cannot be sustained in law, having regard to the subsequent developments which have taken place in this case, granting any effective relief to the writ petitioners with regard to seniority claim would not arise. In addition, we do not find required details in the pleadings of the petitioners to grant that relief. We are not sure whether the management has prepared seniority lists with regard to individual cadres and whether on the basis of such seniority lists promotions were given to the officers of the Gold Unit overlooking the claims of the officers of the Copper Unit. Above all, the Copper Unit itself is closed and all the officers have retired voluntarily under the VRS scheme in the year 2001. It is said and reiterated by the Courts that the Courts should not issue futile writs. Having kept that principle in our mind, we are of the considered opinion that no purpose would be served by issuing mandamus to the management to prepare seniority lists de novo at this distance of time. ( 16 ) IN the result and for the foregoing reasons, we allow the W. A Nos. 5783 and 5784 of 2000 in part and a writ of mandamus shall issue to the respondent-Management to extend the parity of pay scales and attendant allowances I benefits only to the following writ petitioner-Officers: 1 Dr. S. Kulageri 2 Dr. ( 16 ) IN the result and for the foregoing reasons, we allow the W. A Nos. 5783 and 5784 of 2000 in part and a writ of mandamus shall issue to the respondent-Management to extend the parity of pay scales and attendant allowances I benefits only to the following writ petitioner-Officers: 1 Dr. S. Kulageri 2 Dr. S. Ilangovan 3 K. N. Padmanaba Reddy 4 K. Seetharamaiah 5 Shah Nawaz Alikhan 6 Yuvaraj Kaddi 7 C. G. Dyamappa 8 G. M. Parvathappa 9 P. Raghurama Reddy 10 K. T. Ramachandrappa 11 Ranganatbappa 12 M. Rajanna 13 K. P. Nath 14 S. L. Mahesh Gaud 15 M. Prakasb 16 M. K. Venugopal 17 G. S. Kenchappa 18 N. Madhusudhanan 19 M. Sanjeeva Reddy 20 M. D. Balakrishna 21 T. S. Channabasavaraiah 22 H. L. Bhadrapur with effect from 12. 07. 1985. The pecuniary benefits flowing from this order shall be paid to the above 22 members of the first petitioner Association within two months from today. Writ Appeal Nos. 1004 and 1497 of 2001 are dismissed. The parties are directed to bear their respective costs in all the writ appeals. Sri. V. Y. Kumar, learned Government Advocate who appeared for the first respondent in W. A. Nos. 5783 and 5784 of 2000 is granted four weeks times to file memo of appearance. --- *** --- .