Judgment V.K.Bali, J. 1. The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal is to the judgment passed by the learned single Judge dated 31.1.2002 in C.W.P. No. 3932 of 1996, allowing the writ petition filed by Suman Aggarwal, respondent No. 3 herein who successfully sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the appellant Managing Committee of D.A.V. Senior Secondary School, Mustafabad, the appellant herein, to release the grade of Master i.e. 525-1050 with effect from 1.4.1985 revised to 1400-2600 with effect from 1.1.1996, the date from which the petitioner was performing the duties of Social Study Mistress w.e.f. 1.1.1996. 2. The bare minimum facts that need a necessary mention with a view to appreciate the only contention that has been raised in support of the appeal, would reveal that the appellant is running the Managing Committee, which has got 90% grant-in-aid from the State of Haryana. It was initially a higher school and was upgraded to Senior Secondary School with effect from July, 1992. The petitioner who possessed the degree of M.A./B.Ed., was selected against the post of J.B.T, Teacher on 1.4.1985 and had been working in the said school. She cleared her period of probation of 2 years and was working against the sanctioned post in the pay scale which initially was 480-760 and was revised to 1200-2040 with effect from 1.1.1996. It has been the consistent case of the petitioner that from the date she was appointed in the appellant school, she had been teaching senior secondary classes as S.S. Mistress. However, she was being paid the scale of the post of J.B.T. Teacher. She possessed the eligibility criteria for the post of Master, since she possessed the qualification of M.A./B.Ed. The petitioner had been performing the duties of S.S. Mistress and is entitled to the pay scale of that post. 3. The appellant herein opposed the cause of the petitioner only on two grounds. It was stressed before the learned single Judge that writ was not maintainable, as the appellant is a private institution and thus, not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court being not State, and further, that the petitioner was not performing the duties of higher responsibility and, therefore, she should not get salary admissible to the post of S.S. Mistress. 4. Mr. 4. Mr. Saini, learned Counsel for the appellant has not challenged the judgment of the learned single Judge holding that the appellant institution is a Government-Aided Institution and, therefore, it would be amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court and further, that by virtue of Rule 10 of the Haryana Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1971 which lays down that the scale of pay of an employee shall be as specified in column 4 of Appendix A to these rules and the rates of dearness allowance payable to the employees shall be the same as are admissible from time to time to government employees. He, however, vehemently contends that the finding recorded by the learned single Judge that the petitioner was working on the post of S.S. Mistress, has been recorded on the basis of a certificate issued by the Principal and there is no other evidence available for the aforesaid finding and that the Principal had no authority at all to issue the certificate to the petitioner that she was working as a Social Study Mistress, 5. We find no merit in the only contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant. In Para-6 of the petition, specific averment has been made that from the day the petitioner was appointed with the appellant, she had been teaching higher classes as S.S. mistress and yet, is being paid the scale of the post of J.B.T. Teacher and further, that she possessed the eligibility criteria for the post of master/Mistress i.e. M.A./B.Ed. This pleading was sought to be supported from Annexure P-1 which is the appointment letter of the petitioner and reads as under : "On the recommendation of the selection committee Miss Suman Aggarwal d/o Shri Bal Krishan is hereby appointed as S.S. Mistress on J.B.T. Post in D.A.V. High School Mustafabad with effect from the date he/she joins duty, in the grade of Rs. 480-760 plus used allowances sanctioned by the Haryana Govt. from time to time..." Besides the appointment letter reproduced above, the Experience Certificate issued on 7.9.1995 states as follows : "Certified that Miss Suman Aggarwal d/o Shri Bal Krishan Aggarwal, M.A./B.Ed. (M.A. in Political Science) has been working in this institution as a S.S. Teachers sanctioned against a JBT post since 1.4.1985. She is teaching S.S./English to High and Sr. Sec. Classes." 6. (M.A. in Political Science) has been working in this institution as a S.S. Teachers sanctioned against a JBT post since 1.4.1985. She is teaching S.S./English to High and Sr. Sec. Classes." 6. The Court is of the view that petitioner has brought sufficient evidence on records to show that she was teaching as S.S. Mistress, even though against the sanctioned post of J.B.T. Teacher. The same finding can be recorded on yet another ground that in the pleadings made in the written statement, contents of Para No. 6 were not specifically denied. The appellant-Institution failed to mention as to what class the petitioner was teaching if she was not performing the duties of S.S Mistress. What exact duties were being performed by he was also not mentioned. Further, the fact that the petitioner was or not taking classes as S.S. Mistress could be proved by bringing documentary evidence on records which was available with the appellant institution. Its failure to bring on records such documents would necessarily result in drawing an adverse inference against the appellant. The finding on the crucial question, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in our view, has to be returned in favour of the petitioner. If, thus, the petitioner was performing the duties of S.S. Mistress, she must get the pay-scale admissible to the said post. The employer cannot possibly get the work from an employee of a higher post, and yet choose to pay him/her a pay-scale demanding lesser or lighter duties and responsibility. 7. Mr. Saini, learned Counsel for the appellant contends that there was no evidence on records to show that the petitioner had, at any time, worked as a Lecturer. On that contention of learned Counsel, we would only comment that the learned single Judge has not granted any relief like the pay-scale to the petitioner that may be admissible to the post of a Lecturer, even though in the judgment, it has been mentioned, "more so, the school has already been upgraded w.e.f. July, 1992 and the level of the school has been raised to Senior Secondary School and with the enhancing of the status of the institution, the petitioner is performing the duties of the Lecturer". Even though, there are some observations, as extracted above, while allowing the petition, all that has been mentioned is that the petitioner shall be given arrears with effect from 1.1.1996 by determining as against which post she was performing her duties as on 1.1.1996. Simply with a view to clarify, we may only mention that once a finding has been recorded by observing that it is established on the records that petitioner was performing the duties of S.S. Mistress, she would be entitled to the pay scale admissible to the post of S.S. Mistress only right from the date as mentioned by learned single Judge. With the above modification, we uphold the judgment of the learned single Judge and dismiss the Letters Patent Appeal, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.