( 1 ) HEARD the petitioner-in-person. ( 2 ) ONE of the conditions prescribed in Clause 4 of the government Order dated 7-11 -1984 for stepping-up the pay of the senior to the pay of junior is:- (ii) On the date of promotion or on the date on which he was allowed the selection time-scale of pay, the senior Government servant should have been drawing pay equal to or higher than that of the junior Government servant. The same is contrary to the Constitutional mandate enshrined under Articles 14,16,19 and 39-D of the Constitution. The decision reported in GOPALAPPA vs STATE1 was not brought to our notice at the time of disposing of the writ petition. In that decision, the decision of the Supreme Court reported in STATE OF ANDHRA pradesh vs G SREENIVASA RAO2 is followed, in which at paragraph 15 it is held as under:-"15. . . . . . When a single running pay scale is provided in a cadre the constitutional mandate of equal pay for equal work is satisfied. Ordinarily grant ofhigher pay to a junior would ex-facie be arbitrary. . . . " ( 3 ) THE Government has introduced stepping-up system with a view to bring the pay of a senior official on par with his junior when junior get higher pay on promotion. This object is wittled-down by incorporating condition (ii) in Clause 4 of the Government Order. It is an unconstitutional condition. Hence, the order passed by us in the writ petition warrants review. ( 4 ) ACCORDINGLY, the review petition is allowed. The order dated 29-6-2006 passed in W. P. No. 7239/2006 is modified. The writ petition is allowed and the order of K. A. T in O. A. No. 285/2001 is quashed. Respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner keeping in view the observations made above and dispose of the same within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.