Judgment :- Writ petition W.P.No.20061 of 2001 is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order of the second respondent dated 1.10.2001 directing the Executives of the Cooperative and Public Sector Sugar Mills to fix the scale of pay for Medical Officers who are drawing their pay in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 in the revised scale of pay of Rs.10000-325-15200. The case of the petitioner is that he has joined in Ambur Sugar Mills as Medical Officer on 17.1.1977. On 4.11.1987, he got transferred to Tirupattur Co-operative Sugar Mills. In the year 1992, the second respondent considered the service conditions of the Medical Officers working in various Co-operative Sugar Mills and Public Sector Sugar Mills and at that time, the second respondent was competent to frame or modify the service conditions of all common cadre officers. The medical officers also be­longed to the common cadre. After examina­tion of the representation, the second respon­dent has granted Selection Grade and Special Grade scales of pay to such of those Medical Officers who had completed 10 and 20 years of service respectively. Accordingly, the Medi­cal Officers working in the various sugar mills at that-time were placed in Special Grade scales of pay and the said scales of pay were given effect to vide the proceedings of the sec­ond respondent in R.C.No.123 71/91 G 1 -dated 4.5.1992. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that even though he has been working as a Medical Officer from 1977, he got the benefit for the first time only in the year 1992, as stated above. The peti­tioner states that he completed 20 years of service as a Medical Officer on 17.1.1997 and Special Grade was fixed and he was drawing the scale of pay for a Special Grade Officer since 17.1.1997. The petitioner also states that the pay scale of all sugar mills officers were revised pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.302 dated 25.8.2000 passed by the first respondent and the second respondent has implemented the same in respect of the Medical Officers in his proceedings dated 19.10.2000. The case of the petitioner is that while implementing the revised pay scales, the second respondent has wholly ignored the pay scale of Rs.3700-5000, which was the scale of pay of the petitioner at that time. The case of the petitioner is that while implementing the revised pay scales, the second respondent has wholly ignored the pay scale of Rs.3700-5000, which was the scale of pay of the petitioner at that time. In Annexure-1 of the proceedings dated 19.10.2000, after providing for the revised scale The Madras Law Journal - Reports for the existing scale of pay of Rs.4500-15-5700, the next cadre was straight away fix with the scale of pay of Rs.3000-4500 and scale of pay of Rs.3700-5000 was deliberate left out, which was the Special Grade for Medical Officer pay scale. According to the petitioner, by leaving out the said pay scale, petitioner, viz., Dr. N. Jaganathan and another petitioner Dr.V.Dayasagar alone are affected. The petitioner has made a representation the second respondent and the second respondent has passed the impugned order dated 1.10.2000, rejecting the petitioner's request affirming the scale of pay fixed vide the circular dated 19.10.2000. 3. The third respondent, viz., the Special Officer of Tirupattur Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited and Dharmapuri District Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited, under whom the petitioner was working, has filed a counter affidavit stating that the pay revision was made in accordance with the direction of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.302, Industries (MIC.II) Department, dated 25.8.2000 which itself was pass based on the recommendation made by the Committee constituted to examine the anomalies prevailing in that regard. It is also the case of the third respondent that the Government by G.O.Ms.No.834, Industries (MIC.II), dated 8.12.1997 has decided to abolish the common cadre system and consequent to that only, the subsequent G.O.Ms.No.302 dated 25.8.2000 came to be passed. It is also stated by the third respondent that based on G.O.Ms.No.302, in respect of persons drawing revised scale of pay of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000, the revised minimum scale of Rs.10000-325-15200 was, decided to be given effect. Further, the said order was passed based on the financial liability of the sugar mill stating that the Govern­ment has made it clear that the additional financial requirements have been complied with by the respective sugar mills and after abolition of common cadre framed as per the powers given under the said G.O. only the impugned order came to be passed and therefore, the same is not violative of the Constitution of India. 4. 4. The writ petitioners in both the writ petitions are only Medical Officers left out in an anonymous situation and therefore, they have filed the present writ petitions on the above averments. 5. The second respondent in both the writ petitions on behalf of the Government also filed the counter affidavit. While it is admitted that both writ petitioners were granted the Special Grade of pay of scale of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 in the pre-revision scale, based on the representation made by the petitioners the second respondent ordered to draw their, pay in the revised scale of pay of Rs.10000-325-15200 which is applicable to Selection Grade Medical Officers in the pre-revised scale of pay. It is also the case of the second respondent that since the Medical Officers in all the Co-operative Sugar Mills are provided the Selection Grade and Special Grade scales, it was decided to advise the Co-operative Sugar Mills to-fix the scale of pay of these Medical Officer in the ordinary scale applicable to the post. It was based on the representations of the petitioners alone that the pay was fixed in the revised scale of Rs.10000-325-15200 which is I applicable to Selection Grade Officer in the pre-revised scale. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents. 7. It is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioners that a right has been conferred by the service conditions on the petitioners in both the writ as early as on 4.5.1992 by the second respondent himself-by giving Selection Grade scale and Special Grade scale, out of which the Selection Grade was conferred after completion of 10 years of service in the pay scale of Rs.3000-100-3500-125-4500 and Special Grade was conferred after completion of 20 years of service in the scale of pay of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000. Learned counsel would further contend that inasmuch as only two petitioners who are affected in the whole of the State, it has to be treated as an anomalous situation and their claim of equated pay of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000, which is now equivalent to Rs.12000-375-16500, should be granted to the petitioners. Further, the fifth pay commission confers with the fitment benefit, to which the petitioners are entitled and there is no reason to revise it to Rs.10000-325-15200, which has no basis whatsoever. Further, the fifth pay commission confers with the fitment benefit, to which the petitioners are entitled and there is no reason to revise it to Rs.10000-325-15200, which has no basis whatsoever. It is also the contention that denying the Selection Grade pay to the petitioners is arbitrary and the petitioners are entitled for pay protection. The learned counsel relied upon a hierarchy of judgments to show the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work and also show that benefits already conferred cannot be withdrawn without proper reasons, especially in the circumstances where civil consequences have already occurred. The learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court rendered in Braithwaite Officers' Association v. Union of India and others, 2003 Lab.L.C. 213 (Calcutta High Court) to show that the policy decision can be examined to the extent whether it had suffered from non-application of mind and arbitrariness and the same is subject to judicial review. 8. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that the scales of pay of the petitioners are hot disputed and it is only to equalize the petitioners with the other employees of the sugar mills who have been getting the similar scale, the impugned order came to be passed. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the impugned order itself was passed consequent to the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.302 dated 25.8.2000 in which Annexure-1 categorically states that after the scale of pay of Rs.4500-150-5700 which was equal to new scale of pay of Rs.15000-400-18600, the next scale of pay fixed by the Government was only of Rs.3000-100-3500-125-4500 which is equivalent- to the new scale of pay of Rs.10000-325-15200. It is also stated that even if the petitioners feel that there is still need to make representation, they can do so to the Government, which is the authority to decide. 9. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the respondent. It is also stated that even if the petitioners feel that there is still need to make representation, they can do so to the Government, which is the authority to decide. 9. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the respondent. At the outset, it has to be noted that the impugned orders in both the writ petitions came to be passed admittedly in consequence to the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.302, dated 25.8.2000, wherein it has been stated that the scale of pay has been fixed in which the special pay of scale of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 is not finding place in the said G.O.Ms.No.302, which is the basis for passing of the impugned order and the said G.O., remains unchallenged. In my considered opinion, it is not open to the petitioners now to challenge the impugned order without assailing the said G.O. On this-ground itself, the writ petition can be dismissed. 10. The judgments referred by the learned counsel for the petitioners to show that before deciding the scale of pay, adequate opportunity should have been given. On the other hand, it is seen from the impugned order itself that the scale of pay Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 was given as a Special Grade which was not payable to all the employees in the sugar mills and the claim of the petitioners itself is based on the proceedings of the second respondent dated 4.5.1992 and that is sought to be filed by, the impugned order in respect of the s grade pay. However, by protecting the pay of the petitioners in the pre-revised of pay of Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000, it not be said that the petitioners are entitled the revised pay scale based on the fifth commission report. On the other hand, the revision in respect of the employees of the sugar mills, especially the petitioners, has not earlier based on the recommendations of pay commission or the fitment table. 11. Therefore, in my view, it is not open to petitioners now as a matter of right to claim that the fitment table as per the pay commission report as valid. When the pay scale of petitioners in Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 has been revised, as Rs.10000-325-15200 based on the Government Order, which is not assail anywhere, the writ petitions cannot be sustained and therefore, the writ petitions are liable to dismissed. 12. When the pay scale of petitioners in Rs.3700-125-4700-150-5000 has been revised, as Rs.10000-325-15200 based on the Government Order, which is not assail anywhere, the writ petitions cannot be sustained and therefore, the writ petitions are liable to dismissed. 12. However, having regard to the circum stances of the case wherein the petitioners an losing the amount by the revised pay, eve though the pay scale of R.s.3700-150-5000 in stated to have been protected, what was given earlier by the proceedings of the second respondent on 4.5.1992 itself was only a solatium since the same was conferred on the basis that the Medical Officers working in the sugar mills had no chance of any promotion and there was a stagnation. In these circum stances, it is open to the petitioners to make further representation to the Government explaining the anomalous situation and this Court gives liberty to the petitioners not only due b the reason that there is anomaly in their scale of pay, but also in view of the fact that they an the only two Medical Officers throughout the State who are affected by the peculiar situation who are the petitioners in the writ petitions. If such representation is made by the petitioners to the first respondent, the first respondent shall, after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioners, pass orders within a period of 12 weeks after the said representation is made. With the above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.