JUDGMENT 1. (Oral) - This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 13.1.2004 rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6839/2003. The brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are as follows : 2. The post of Gram Sewak-cum-Paden Secretary carrying pay-scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 was advertised on 26th February, 1999 by the District Establishment Committee, Zila Parishad, Udaipur. Pursuant to the advertisement, the appellants applied for the post in question. The appellants were declared successful in the written examination, which was held by the District Establishment Committee for selection of the candidates for the said post. It appears that soon after the appellants were declared successful in the examination a general ban was imposed on appointments. Subsequently, the ban was lifted. Despite the ban being lifted, the appellants were not appointed in a regular pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 but were appointed on 15.11.1999 against the post in question on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1200/- per month vide orders dated 31.5.2002 and 1.6.2002, Annexure 5 and 6 to the application seeking leave to place documents on record. Subsequently, by orders of the Panchayat Samiti dated 1st June, 2003 the appellant were ultimately confirmed against the aforesaid post and were placed in regular pay scale viz., Rs. 3200-85-4900 with effect from 1st June, 2003. 3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents granting regular pay sale with effect from 1st June, 2003 and not from the date of their original appointment viz., 15.11.1999, the appellants filed a writ petition. The learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition on 31st October, 2003. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellants have filed with instant appeal. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. It is not in dispute that the appellants were given meagre salary inspite of the fact that before their appointment they had been declared successful in the written examination held for selecting candidates for the post of Gram Sewak-cum-Paden Secretary. Though the appellants were functioning as Gram Sewak-cum-Paden Secretary with effect from 15.11.1999 the salary which was being paid to them was not the salary of that post. The admitted position is that the post carried pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 while they were paid consolidated salary of Rs. 1200/- per month. 6. Though the appellants were functioning as Gram Sewak-cum-Paden Secretary with effect from 15.11.1999 the salary which was being paid to them was not the salary of that post. The admitted position is that the post carried pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 while they were paid consolidated salary of Rs. 1200/- per month. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly stated that the appellants are not insisting for payment of difference between the salary paid to them on consolidated basis and salary based on pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 from the date of their initial appointment to the date of confirmation. But they are claiming national benefit of the pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 from the date of initial appointment till 1st June, 2002. The submission is a fair one and needs to be accepted since they were deprived of the regular scale of pay even though they had succeeded in the examination held for selection of candidates for the aforesaid post. The State must act as a model employer. It cannot take undue advantage of the need of the employee, who does not have any real choice in the matter of employment due to economic compulsions. In case he does not take up the job he and his family face starvation and deprivation. An applicant seeking employment in a scarce job market scenario has almost no bargaining power against the mighty State. The action of the State which is unjust, unfair and unreasonable is violative of Article 14. Being violative of Article 14, the same can be challenged and challenge cannot be defeated on the ground that protection of fundamental right stood waived by the conduct of the challenger. As otherwise the guarantee offered by Part IV of the Constitution will become a teasing illusion and a mirage. The Court acting as sentinel on the qui vive is under an obligation to prevent the contravention of the fundamental rights. It is, however, made clear that where the State has offered fair terms of employment and the candidate accepts the same by taking up the job without demur, in that event he is bound by the terms and he cannot be allowed to challenge the same subsequently. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed and the order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed and the order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. It is directed that the appellants shall be given notional benefit of the pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 from the date of their initial appointment till 1st June, 2002. Thereafter, they shall be given actual benefit of the regular pay scale and their salary shall be fixed afresh within a period of two months. We would also like to clarify that neither expressly nor by implication we have held the appellants to be entitled to secure actual payment of salary on the basis of pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 from the date of initial appointment to the date of confirmation. It is only from the date of confirmation that the appellants will be entitled to limited relief as indicated above.Appeal allowed. *******