Judgment :- M. CHOCKALINGAM, J. The State of Pondicherry challenges the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A. No.866 of 2005, whereby the second respondents request was ordered. 2. The Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the State of Pondicherry. 3. The short facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition can be stated as follows:- (i) The applicant joined service as a direct recruit as Librarian in the Law Department with a pay scale of Rs.1350-2200 in the year 1987. The library staff under the purview of Central Government were subjected to a review in order to make a classification and of libraries and also the scale of pay attached to them for the purpose of making a revision and to prescribe uniform pay scale. The Review Committee, which was constituted, submitted its report on 24.7.1990 and the same was accepted by the State of Pondicherry. Pursuant to the said report, the scale of pay of the applicant i.e. Rs.1350-2200 for the post of Librarian has to be revised as Rs.1400-2600 with effect from 24.7.1990 and further revision to the higher scale of Rs.2000-3500 with effect from the same date. (ii) Since the library in the law department had been determined to be one falling under category II as per the said report, the applicant sought direction to the State Government by filing O.A. No.250 of 1994. On an enquiry, it was held that the applicant was entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 and also a direction was given to the State Government to decide whether the applicant was entitled to the higher scale of pay in accordance with the relevant instructions within a stipulated period and also the arrears of salary to be disbursed to the applicant within a stipulated period. (iii) A disciplinary proceedings were initiated alleging that the applicant produced a bogus B.A. degree certificate and thereafter, it was ultimately ended in the charges not being proved and he was given the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600. Number of representations were made by him to redesignate him as Assistant Library and Information Officer in the scale of Rs.2000-3500 with effect from 24.7.1990. (iv) An order emanated from the State Government on 19.12.2002 stating that the request would be considered as per the Government of Indias instructions on the reconstitution of Committee therefrom and submit its report. Number of representations were made by him to redesignate him as Assistant Library and Information Officer in the scale of Rs.2000-3500 with effect from 24.7.1990. (iv) An order emanated from the State Government on 19.12.2002 stating that the request would be considered as per the Government of Indias instructions on the reconstitution of Committee therefrom and submit its report. An order came to be passed finally on 8.7.2005 that the applicant was to get the pay scale of Group B Gazetted post-Assistant Library and Information Officer, carrying the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 purely on temporary and ad hoc basis and that too only prospectively. (v) Under the circumstances, he filed O.A. No.866 of 2005 and it was taken up for enquiry by the Tribunal. After giving opportunity to the State of Pondicherry and looking into the materials available on record and hearing the submissions, the Tribunal took the view that the applicant was entitled for the relief and accordingly, it is ordered. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioners/State of Pondicherry has brought forth this writ petition. 4. The only contention put forth by the learned counsel appearing for the State of Pondicherry is that as on today, the second respondent has been given the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 which is available to Group B Gazetted post of Assistant Library and Information Officer and thus, there was no loss of monetary benefit to the second respondent. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said to be in any way discriminatory and as on today, he has been on temporary and ad hoc basis. Since the Government of India has to give its instructions and the Committee has got to be reconstituted for that purpose and a report was to be filed, till that time, the regularisation cannot be done. Under such circumstances, the second respondent cannot have any grievance till that time and he has to wait. 5. After going through the materials available on record, the Court is of the considered opinion that the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the State of Pondicherry cannot be accepted. It is not in controversy that the second respondent joined the service in the year 1987 in the Law Department as Librarian on the pay scale of Rs.1350-2200. 5. After going through the materials available on record, the Court is of the considered opinion that the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the State of Pondicherry cannot be accepted. It is not in controversy that the second respondent joined the service in the year 1987 in the Law Department as Librarian on the pay scale of Rs.1350-2200. Though a report was given by the Review Committee, as per which, he was entitled to the scale of pay of Rs.1400-2600 with effect from 24.7.1990, the same was not made available to him, which necessitated the second respondent to file O.A. No.250 of 1994 before the Tribunal, in which, an order came to be passed in favour of the second respondent. Even then, that was not given effect to. 6. On the contrary, it was denied by way of disciplinary proceedings stating that he has produced the bogus B.A. degree Certificate. Though charges were levelled, they were not actually proved and hence, it came to an end. Thereafter, he was given the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600. He made number of representations that he should be redesignated as Assistant Library and Information Officer in the scale of pay of Rs.2000-3500 with effect from 24.7.1990. It was kept pending all along the period. 7. Finally an order came to be passed stating that he was fitted in the pay scale of Group B Gazetted post-Assistant Library and Information Officer with the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500, but on temporary and ad hoc basis. Now the contention put forth by the learned counsel appearing for the State of Pondicherry that there was no monetary loss cannot be a reason to deny him regularization or to redesignate him as Assistant Library and Information Officer. 8. As could be seen from the available materials, even a junior, whose name is mentioned, has been given effect to in the post of Assistant Library and Information Officer. What was the impediment felt by the Government for regularizing the second respondent is not known. On the contrary, the contention of the learned counsel for the State of Pondicherry that a Committee has to be reconstituted by the Government of India and following the report, instructions were to be received by the State Government and only then, regularization has to be done cannot be accepted even for a moment. 9. On the contrary, the contention of the learned counsel for the State of Pondicherry that a Committee has to be reconstituted by the Government of India and following the report, instructions were to be received by the State Government and only then, regularization has to be done cannot be accepted even for a moment. 9. Since long delay has been caused in one way or other, the contention of the learned counsel for the State of Pondicherry cannot be accepted. Regularization has to be done after seeking instructions of the Government of India, there cannot be any impediment for the State Government to get the same and regularize the second respondent without any delay. Under those circumstances, the writ petition does not carry any merit whatsoever and the order passed by the Tribunal is confirmed. The writ petition stands dismissed accordingly. Consequently, the connected M.Ps. are also dismissed. No costs.