Judgment J.C.S. Rawat, J. 1. This Special Appeal, under Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules, has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23-03-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 217 of 2003 (S/S), Preetam Prasad Dobhal & Another Vs. State of Uttaranchal, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition & directed appellant/State to decide the controversy and pay revised pay scale to the petitioners within one month. 2. A writ petition bearing No. 217 (S/S) of 2003 was filed before the learned Single Judge by the writ petitioners (respondents) for the following reliefs : "i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 11-11-2002 passed by respondent (Annexed as Annexure No. 12) to this writ petition. ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to sanction the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 for the post of Electric Assistant working in the Government Hotel Management and Catering Institute Dehradun. iii. To issue any other order or direction which be deemed fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioners. iv. To award cost of the writ petition to the petitioners." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the writ petitioners/respondents were holding Diploma in Electrical Engineering as such they were qualified to be appointed as Electrical Assistant in any Electrical Department in the State Government as well as Central Government. In the month of July, 1982, two posts of Electrical Assistants in the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 were sanctioned in the Government Hotel Management and Catering Institute at Dehradun (hereinafter referred as Institute). The petitioner No.1 was appointed as Electrical Assistant on the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 in the Institute by the Director Tourism U.P. Lucknow on 29-07-1986 and the petitioner No.2 was appointed as Electrical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs.975-1660 on 14-09-1992 by the Director of Tourism, U.P. in the Institute. Both the petitioners were working in their post since then continuously. In the year 1989, the State Government constituted a Committee known as 'Samta Samiti' for consideration of the parity in the pay scale of State Government employees with the employees of the Central Government. After recommendation of the Committee, the pay scale of Rs. Both the petitioners were working in their post since then continuously. In the year 1989, the State Government constituted a Committee known as 'Samta Samiti' for consideration of the parity in the pay scale of State Government employees with the employees of the Central Government. After recommendation of the Committee, the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 has been revised as 9751660 vide G.O. No. 3933/41-89/503/87 dated 15-09-1989 for the post of Electrical Assistant in the Institute. It was alleged that the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 was given to the Electric Assistant on the basis of recommendation 1989 Part I, Table IV of the Samata Samitti report which is for non technical employees. The IVth Pay Commission has recommended pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 for the post of Technical Supervisors having three years diploma in Engineering. The IVth Pay Commission consolidated the entire supervisory cadre and recommended pay scale Rs. 1400-2300 for the said cadre. On 08-01-1990, the petitioners made a representation before the authority concerned requesting therein that the pay scale of 975-1660 has wrongly been given to them. Therefore, the matter was referred to the State Government for reconsideration. On 26-10-1991, the Deputy Secretary of the Tourism Department has also written a letter to the Pay Review Committee (Finance Department) through Secretary U.P. Government, Lucknow requesting therein that the pay scale of the Electrical Assistant in the Institute has wrongly been fixed whereas the Technical Supervisors working in the Central Government has been given pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300. It was further alleged that the employees working on the post of Junior Reader/Reader Grade II who were being paid the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 have been sanctioned the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040 in the revised pay scale and qualification of the said employees was also same as Electrical Assistant. Therefore, the Electrical Assistant of the Government Hotel Management and Catering Institute be paid the pay Scale of Rs. 1200-2040 instead of Rs. 975-1660. It was further alleged that all the Central Government Department and department of State of UP., the person holding the post which requires the qualification of 3 years diploma in electrical engineering are being paid the salary of Rs. 1400-2300 but in the case of Electrical Assistant working in the Institute, having the same qualification, are being paid pay scale of Rs. 975-1660. 1400-2300 but in the case of Electrical Assistant working in the Institute, having the same qualification, are being paid pay scale of Rs. 975-1660. It was alleged that the Technical Assistant having the same qualification, i.e., 3 years diploma in Electrical Engineering working in National Institute for Visually Handicap Dehradun has been recommended the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 by the Commission. Further the Institute of Hotel Management and Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition, which was sponsored by the Central Government, the pay scale of 1400-2300 was being given to the similarly situated employees. It was further alleged that the petitioners have also filed a Writ Petition No. 41875 of 1996 before the Allahabad High Court which was transferred to this Cour1 after creation of the State. The said writ petition was disposed of on 24-05-2002 and the respondent/State was directed to consider the pay scale of the petitioners in the light of the grievance raised in the writ petition. However, the Government rejected the representation of the petitioners vide order 11-01-2002. Feeling aggrieved by this, the writ petitioners (respondent) had filed the writ petition before the learned Single Judge. 4. The respondents/State had filed counter affidavit and pleaded that the petitioners/ respondents were holding the post of Electrical Assistants which come under the category of lower grade technical post. The post of Technical Assistant, which was lowest in the technical grade, and the contention of the petitioners to claim parity with the post of Supervisor was totally misconceived. It was pleaded that Samata Samiti has recommended the revision in the pay scale on the basis of post, grade, duties and responsibilities. It was submitted that the posts of Technical Assistant in the Electrical Engineering Department of the National Institute of Visually Handicapped, Dehradun was in a different grade and the pay scale of Technical Assistant prior to 01-01-1986 was Rs. 450-700 whereas the pay scale of the petitioners/ respondents was Rs. 400-615 as such, the allegations of the petitioners were misconceived. It was further pleaded that the parity claimed by the petitioners with regard to work, pay scale and nomenclature with respect to other posts was misconceived. At last, it was pleaded that the writ petition was misconceived and is liable to be dismissed. 5. 400-615 as such, the allegations of the petitioners were misconceived. It was further pleaded that the parity claimed by the petitioners with regard to work, pay scale and nomenclature with respect to other posts was misconceived. At last, it was pleaded that the writ petition was misconceived and is liable to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on 22-03-2006 and directed appellant/State to decide the controversy and pay revised-pay scale to the petitioners/respondents within one month. 6. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the respondent/State has preferred the present special appeal. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal the record. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant/State contended that as per the Samata Samiti recommendation pay scale of the posts under the State Government was to be revised in accordance with the corresponding pay scales of the equivalent existing posts under the Central Government and where the equivalent post does not exist in the services of the Central Government, the pay scales of such posts under the State Government was to be revised on the basis of the post, responsibilities & corresponding pay scale existing in the services of the Central Government. It was contended that the post of Electrical Assistant held by the respondents/petitioners under the services of the State Government did not exist in the services of the Central Government, therefore, the pay scale of Electrical Assistant was to be revised on the basis of the post held by them, grade, and responsibilities revised pay scale of the Central Government equivalent to that of Electrical Assistant as enumerated in Table-IV. It was contended that the parity claimed by the respondent/writ petitioners with certain other posts under the Central Govt. viz Technical Supervisor in the Central Government, Technical Assistant in National Institute for Visually Handicapped, Dehradun, Maintenance Foreman & Caretaker in Hotel Management & Catering Technology sponsored by the Central Government was absolutely misconceived because the respondents/writ petitioners have not established in the writ petition that their mode of recruitment, nature of work, duties and responsibilities are akin to those of the Central Government posts. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondents/writ petitioners are being paid the revised salaries in accordance with Table-IV of the Samata Samiti which is applicable in their case as the post of Electrical Assistant is not available in the services under the Central Govt. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the learned Single Judge erred without considering the entire matter as to whether there is any substantial parity established by the respondents/writ petitioners. It was further contended that the learned Single Judge erred in issuing mandamus to the appellant to pay the revised scales to the respondents/writ petitioners. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners refuted the contention and supported the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned counsel• for the respondents contended that the IVth Pay Commission constituted by the Central Government has recommended pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 per month for the post of Technical Supervisor having three years diploma in Engineering. It was further contended that prior to the recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission, the pay scale of Rs. 380-560, 380-640, 425-600, 425-640, 425-700 and 455-700 were available for Supervisory cadre and the pay scale for the said cadre was recommended Rs. 1400-2300. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners further contended that in the Central Government department and U.P. State Government department, the person holding the post which requires the qualification of three years diploma in Electrical Engineering are being paid the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 but in case of Electrical Assistant working in the Institute having the same qualification, i.e. three years diploma in Electrical Engineering, are being paid Rs. 975-1660 per month which is not justified. It was further contended that the Technical Assistant having the same qualification, i.e., 3 years diploma in Electrical Engineering working at National Institute for Visually Handicap Dehradun has been recommended the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 per month by the IVth Pay Commission. 10. The respondent No.1 Preetam Prasad Dobhal was appointed on 29-07-1986 as Electrical Assistant on the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 in the Institute. The respondent NO.2 Kulbir Singh Lingwal was appointed on 14-09-1992 as Electrical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 in the Institute. The Central Government approved the recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission and directed to be implemented from 01-01-1986. 400-615 in the Institute. The respondent NO.2 Kulbir Singh Lingwal was appointed on 14-09-1992 as Electrical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 in the Institute. The Central Government approved the recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission and directed to be implemented from 01-01-1986. Thereafter, the State Government also constituted a Committee known as Samata Samiti in the year 1989 for consideration of the parity in the pay scale of the State Government employees with the employees of the Central Government according to the recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission. After the recommendation of the Samata Samiti, the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 was revised as 975-1660 on 15-09-1989 for the post of Electrical Assistant in the Institute. 11. The report of the Samata Samiti has been filed alongwith the Special Appeal. The relevant portion of the same is quoted hereunder:- 12. The Samata Samiti has recommended the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 to the Electrical Assistant and other similarly placed person working in the lower technical grade as specified in the report. The relevant portion of the said report is quoted hereunder: 13. Perusal of the Samata Samiti report reveals that point Nos. 1 and 2 are not applicable in the case of the respondents/writ petitioners because the identical posts are not available in the Central Government as such, Schedule 2 and 3 of Samata Samiti report could not be applicable in the case of the respondents/writ petitioners. Schedule 4 would be applicable in the case of the respondents/writ petitioners as has been indicated in para 3 of the Samata Samiti report. The extract of 7.20 Samata Samiti report referred above relates to the posts which are in existence in the State Cadre but these posts are not available in the Central Government The respondents/writ petitioners have been holding the post of Electrical Assistants which come under the category of lower grade technical post, as such, the respondents/writ petitioners are covered under the category of entry 7.20 which relates to the lower grade technical post The second para of 7.20 of Samata Samiti is only a suggestion and it is not a recommendation. 14. 14. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners tried to emphasize that the respondents/writ petitioners are holding technical posts and the person who are holding technical post and whose qualification at the time of appointment is three years diploma in Engineering in any trade would be counted to be technical person. They cannot be equated with the pay scale of non technical staff. Learned counsel for the respondents / writ petitioners tried to emphasize that at serial No.8 of schedule 1, Compounder / Pharmacist which requires special diploma were getting pay scale of Rs. 400-615 but they were given pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 by the IVth Pay Commission. For the post of Lab Technician, Dental Hygienist and X-ray Technician / Radiographer at serial No.1 to 3 of schedule 1, they were in the pay scale of 400-615,400-615 and 430-685 respectively and they were given pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040, 1200-2040 and 1350-2200 respectively. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners tried to emphasize that in schedule 1 the Signaler Grade and Head Constable who were getting pay scale of Rs. 400-615 and 400-615 respectively were given pay scale of 975-1660 and 975-1660 respectively. The post of Signaler and Head Constable were of non-technical person. We are not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners because the post of Compounder, Lab Technician, Dental Hygienist and X-ray Technician / Radiographer were also available in the Central Government. This fact has been revealed from the perusal of the said report at serial No.4 which has been indicated in the chart against each post. 15. Thus the Samata Samiti report clearly provides that if the nomenclature of the post and pay scale were available in the said identical post to the Central Government, the schedule 1 would be applicable. The post of Electrical Assistant was not available in the Central Government so fresh decision was taken that the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 would be given to the respondents and other similarly placed persons working in the lower technical grade as specified in the entry 7.20 of the Samata Samiti report as mentioned above. The post of Electrical Assistant was not available in the Central Government so fresh decision was taken that the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 would be given to the respondents and other similarly placed persons working in the lower technical grade as specified in the entry 7.20 of the Samata Samiti report as mentioned above. The Samata Samiti report had nowhere indicated that the person holding the technical posts and whose technical qualification at the time of appointment was essential in any trade would be counted to be technical employee and those persons would not be equated with the pay scale of non technical staff. The learned counsel for the respondents could not demonstrate us that the Samata Samiti report has classified the posts for the purpose of providing pay scale. On the contra the report contains that all lower technical posts had been classified and clubbed in one post as stated above in report 7.20 (2) and the classification of post has been made according to above quoted report. 16. Learned counsel for the respondents further contended that the Technical Assistant having the same qualification of 3 years diploma in electrical engineering working at National Institute for Visually Handicap Dehradun has been recommended the pay scale of 1400-2300 per month by the IVth Pay Commission. The Institute of Hotel Management and Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition which is sponsored by the Central Govt. are paying the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 to the post of Maintenance Foreman-cum-Caretaker. The qualification of such posts is the same as Electrical Assistant in the Institute. The appellant in the counter affidavit has submitted that the corresponding pay scale of Technical Assistant prior to 1-1-1986 was Rs. 450-700 whereas the pay scale of the respondents was Rs. 400-615. 17. The appellant in the counter affidavit has stated that the Institute of Hotel Management & Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition belonged to the Tamilnadu Government. Learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed in the rejoinder affidavit that the said institutes belonged to the Tamilnadu Government. The respondent No.1 joined the services in the year 1986 whereas the respondent No.2 had joined in the year 1992 when the IVth Pay Commission had been finalized. The respondent No.2 was aware of the pay scale of Rs. Learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed in the rejoinder affidavit that the said institutes belonged to the Tamilnadu Government. The respondent No.1 joined the services in the year 1986 whereas the respondent No.2 had joined in the year 1992 when the IVth Pay Commission had been finalized. The respondent No.2 was aware of the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 and he accepted the said pay scale with open eyes and he cannot dispute the pay scale which has already been mentioned in his appointment letter. The State Government has not accepted the IVth Pay Commission in its entirety. The State Government after the enforcement of the IVth Pay Commission constituted a Committee for making the recommendations with regard to the pay and posts of the persons working under it. The Samata Samiti has given its recommendations and the Government has accepted the recommendations. The State Government has exercised its discretion in accordance with the guidelines laid down in the aforementioned Samata Samiti report. The arguments which have been advanced do not find place in the Samata Samiti report. The pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 has been given to the respondents/writ petitioners and other similarly placed person working in the lower technical grade as specified in entry No.7 .20 of the Samata Samiti report. 18. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the respondents/writ petitioners are sometime claiming parity with the Technical Supervisor having three years diploma in engineering having pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300; sometimes they are claiming the parity with the Junior Reader/Reader Grade-II working in the Press at the pay scale of 1200-2040; sometime to the Technical Assistant in the Electrical Engineering Department of the National Institute of Visually Handicapped, Dehradun in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300; and sometime Hotel Management and Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition. It was further contended that the respondents/writ petitioners are alleging that they possess the required qualification, as such, they are entitled to the pay scale of the Supervisory staff, Junior Reader, Technical Assistant of the Central Government. It was further contended that the Samata Samiti specifically recommended the revision in the pay scale on the basis of the post, grade, qualification, process of selection and duties. It was further contended that the Samata Samiti specifically recommended the revision in the pay scale on the basis of the post, grade, qualification, process of selection and duties. The respondents/writ petitioners have tried to claim the parity with the various posts of the employees as indicated above working in the Central Government without going into the fact that what are the duties and responsibilities of those posts. The pay parity can only be claimed when the respondents/writ petitioners could have shown the parity with the posts, duties, responsibilities, similar method of recruitment and qualification. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners refuted the contention. It is true that the respondents/writ petitioners can only claim parity if the employees of the various departments of the Central Government with whom the parity has been claimed by the respondents/writ petitioners perform the same or similar nature of duties in different departments of the Government and are their responsibilities, training qualification compatibility which would entitle them to equal pay for the equal work with the other employees. The Samata Samiti has recommended the revision of the pay scale on the basis of the posts, grade, duties, responsibilities, qualification and method of recruitment. The Samata Samiti while recommending the pay scale to the respondents/writ petitioners has categorically observed in its report at para 7.20 which has been reproduced in the preceding para of the judgment that the respondents/writ petitioners were getting the pay scale of Rs. 400-615 prior to the enforcement of the Samata Samiti report and they were giving the pay scale of Rs. 975-1660 by the Samata Samiti report which was approved by the Government. The report reveals that the pay scale of 975-1660 has been given to the respondents/writ petitioners and other similarly placed person working in the lower technical grade. The entry 7.20 of the Samata Samiti report relates to the posts which are in the existence in the State cadre but their corresponding equivalent posts are not available/non existing in the Central Government. The respondents/writ petitioners have been holding the post of Electrical Assistant which is under the category of lower grade technical posts, as such respondents/writ petitioners rightly come under the said category which relates to the lower grade technical posts for which table 4 of the Samata Samiti report provides the pay scale of 975-1660. The respondents/writ petitioners have been holding the post of Electrical Assistant which is under the category of lower grade technical posts, as such respondents/writ petitioners rightly come under the said category which relates to the lower grade technical posts for which table 4 of the Samata Samiti report provides the pay scale of 975-1660. The recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission annexed as annexure IV of the writ petition for the posts of technical Supervisor is quoted hereunder : "11.27 Posts in the scale of Rs. 380-560 from the lowest supervisory level. Direct recruitment of Diploma holder is resorted to a limited extent in certain defence units. Since Rs. 380-560 is also lie of highly skilled grade-1 employee, a request has been made for upgradation of posts at this level of the major departments, railways alone have a lower supervisory scale of Rs. 330-480 for mistris. We understand that mistris working in certain selected are like loco and electric multiple unit or sheds, where they are in independent charge and supervisor highly skilled artisans, are given special pay of Rs. 35/- per month. Taking note of these facts, we are of the view that in all departments the lowest supervisory level should be in the scale of Rs. 1400-2300. The work content of mistris in scale of Rs. 330-480 should be reviewed by railways. Those who are basically workers should placed in the highly skilled grade (Rs. 1200-1800) and the others who can be clearly identified as Supervisors may be given the scale of Rs. 1400-2300. 11.28 Keeping in view the staffing pattern in the workshop we recommend the following pay scales for technical supervisors. Existing Scale Proposed scale of pay 380-560} 380-640} 425-600} Rs. 1400-2300 425-640} 425-700} 455-700} 550-750} RS.1600-2660 550-800} 700-960} Rs. 1200-3200 650-960} 840-1040} Rs.2375-3500 840-1200} 11.29 Different schemes of incentive payment i.e. payment by result for the output by the employee in industrial establishment of government, are in operation. Basically, all the schemes have common approach. The basic wages of the workers are guarantee in all the schemes." 19. Perusal of the recommendation clearly reveals that the post of Electrical Assistant is lowest supervisory level posts and the recommendation itself categorically states that those who are basically workers had been placed in the pay scale or Rs. 1200-1800. Basically, all the schemes have common approach. The basic wages of the workers are guarantee in all the schemes." 19. Perusal of the recommendation clearly reveals that the post of Electrical Assistant is lowest supervisory level posts and the recommendation itself categorically states that those who are basically workers had been placed in the pay scale or Rs. 1200-1800. The post of the respondents/writ petitioners is Electrical Assistant who discharge the work at the lower level as Electrical Assistant, as such, they cannot claim parity with the Supervisory staff as the work and duties performed by the Electrical Assistant and the Supervisors are not identical. There is no question of giving them equal pay for the equal work. The principal of equal pay for the equal work depends upon the nature of the duties performed by the particular category of posts and the qualification for their recruitment. The respondents/writ petitioners have also claimed parity with the Junior Reader and Reader Grade-II of the Central Government working in the Press who were in the pay scale of Rs.400-615 and who were given the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040. The contention of the respondents/writ petitioners that they possess the qualification working in Technical Assistant in the Electrical Engineering Department of the National Institute of Visually Handicapped, Dehradun, as such, they are also entitled to the same pay scale is totally misconceived as their performance, duties and responsibility are different. Learned counsel for the respondents/ writ petitioners could not demonstrate us as to how the work and duties performed by those employees referred above and the respondents/writ petitioners are identical. The pay scale of Technical Assistant in National Institute of Visually Handicapped, Dehradun run be Central Government were the pay scale of Rs. 450-700 prior to the commencement of the IVth Pay Commission whereas the respondents/writ petitioners' pay scale was Rs. 400-615. It is well settled position of law that if the category of posts perform the same duty, function and the method of recruitment carries the same qualification then there should not be any distinction in pay scale between two categories of post similarly situated but when they are different and perform different duties then they cannot be said to be equated so as to qualify for equal pay for the equal work. The material which is on record categorically shows 'that there is a distinction with regard to nature of duties and function between the posts of the Electrical Assistant, Technical Supervisor and other employees as indicated above. Looking into the nature of the duties which is being discharged go to show that the Electrical Assistant, Supervisor and other Technical Assistant, Junior Reader/ Reader Grade-II are not discharging the identical duties. It was submitted that work of Technical Supervisor starts after the work of Electrical Assistant ends. It clearly shows that the work and duty which is being discharged by the Supervisor is of supervisory nature whereas the Electrical Assistant do the job on the lowest level and they have no supervisory work at all. 20. The Samata Samiti constituted by the State Government indicated in its report that while considering the pay scale, the method of recruitment for all the category of employees would be considered while granting the pay scale where their corresponding equivalent posts are not available or non-existing in the Central Government. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners could not show us the method of recruitment for all category of employees with whom the respondents/writ petitioners are claiming parity and the method of recruitment of the respondents/writ petitioners is the same as at the stage of initial entry into the service they all have to pass the prescribed written test. We are afraid, it cannot be possible to accept the said submission that the method of recruitment for all the category of employees of the Central Government with whom the respondents/petitioners are claiming parity and the Electrical Assistant, the post which the respondents/writ petitioners have been holding are the same as at the initial stage of entry. No material has been placed on record and nothing has been pointed out to us to hold that same identical written tests were required to be passed by all those pertaining to different categories. We, therefore, are of the view that the method of recruitment for all the categories of employees as indicated above are different. 21. No material has been placed on record and nothing has been pointed out to us to hold that same identical written tests were required to be passed by all those pertaining to different categories. We, therefore, are of the view that the method of recruitment for all the categories of employees as indicated above are different. 21. Learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners while claiming parity with the Central Government had also contended that the respondents/writ petitioners made a representation to the State Government and the Deputy Secretary of Tourism Department has recommended the case of the respondents/writ petitioners on 26-10-1991 requesting the Finance Department that the pay scale of Electrical Assistant in the Institute has been wrongly fixed and they should be given the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 which the Technical Supervisor working in the Central Government has been provided. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge erred in holding that the respondents/writ petitioners are entitled to get the parity with the Supervisor of the Central Government who is getting the pay scale of 1400-2300. The Government had rightly rejected the representation of the respondents/writ petitioners. 22. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 22-03-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 217 of 2003 (S/S) is hereby set aside and the writ petition is dismissed. 23. No order as to costs.