ORDER 1. At the time when this writ petition was filed, all the four petitioners were mechanics, who are technical staff, with the Civil Aviation Department, Government of Bihar. In course of time, petitioner no.2 acquired A.M.E. (Aircraft Maintenance Engineer) certification having certificate A & C as endorsed thereof (Annexure-11 to the petitioners’ rejoinder to the supplementary counter affidavit of the State). Thus, he became an engineer. 2. The grievance of the mechanics/technical staff is that they are an integral part of the staff for keeping an aircraft in flying condition or flying. The Pilot flies the aircraft after the engineer finally certificates the aircraft for airworthiness. But, this certification cannot be done unless the mechanics like the petitioners certify it. The grievance is that the State Government consciously took a decision to give incentive to the pilots, engineers and technicians on the pattern of the State of Uttar Pradesh. But mischievously, while incentives were granted to the pilots and engineers, the mechanics/technicians and others were forgotten. State does not deny that incentive was contemplated to be granted to persons involved in maintenance and flying of aircraft. 3. When the first counter affidavit was filed, an attempt was made to deny that State has nothing to do with the scheme as obtaining in State of Uttar Pradesh, but unwittingly, in the counter affidavit itself, they annexed the entire resolution of the State Government dated 26.08.1996 and then again dated 20.10.1998 (Annexures-A&B respectively to the counter affidavit of the State), wherein it is categorically stated that the State of Bihar is following the pattern in respect of State of Uttar Pradesh. Thus, the attempt on behalf of the State to deny the incentive and saying that nothing to do in this regard with respect to State of Uttar Pradesh is obviously falsified by their own documents. A reference to Annexures-1&2 to the writ petition would clearly show that in the State of Uttar Pradesh what was being done was that there was incentive being given to all connected with the maintenance of the aircraft and its flying. Specifically it is mentioned that apart from pilot and engineers, maintenance staff including ordinary staff were given the incentive. But, when it came to Bihar, though they adopted the pattern of Uttar Pradesh, for some unknown reasons, incentives were restricted to pilots and engineers and mechanics/technicians having special licenses. Specifically it is mentioned that apart from pilot and engineers, maintenance staff including ordinary staff were given the incentive. But, when it came to Bihar, though they adopted the pattern of Uttar Pradesh, for some unknown reasons, incentives were restricted to pilots and engineers and mechanics/technicians having special licenses. When this Court wanted to know that what are special licenses that are required by the mechanic, as was being used by the State, not a chit of paper can be brought on record except bald statement which has no substance. Lastly, it is submitted that petitioner no.2, Abhay Kumar, mechanic obtained licence (Annexure-11) with endorsement of Class-A&C and the day he got them he has been given incentive. On the strength of this, it is urged that any mechanic who would get licence would become entitled to incentive. But, nothing was said by the State as to whether the importance of mechanic having no such licence? But the facts remains that the so called licence of petitioner no.2 is now on record as Annexure-11. It is a licence of A.M.E. with certification rating A&C thereon. This licence would itself show that while working as a mechanic, he undertook the course of engineering in aircraft maintenance and in phases received certificates and, ultimately, was granted this licence with effect from 11.01.2010 as an engineer. He ceases to be a mechanic. This fact is further borne out from the daily inspection reports of various aircrafts from time to time. The daily inspection reports of earlier period show that this petitioner no.2 used to sign as a mechanic, but soon after he got aircraft maintenance engineering licence, he started signing as an engineer and not as a mechanic. Thus, the stand of the State that if the mechanic got a certification like petitioner no.2, he would get incentive is wrong. The incentive was for becoming an engineer from mechanic and not as a mechanic with certification. These certificates also show one thing that without the mechanic’s endorsement, the certificate remains incomplete. Even if the engineer signs it and the pilot is ready to fly the aircraft cannot be permitted to be flown. The importance of mechanic, thus, cannot be ignored. It is first his signature then the signature of engineer and then the work of pilot that makes the aircraft fly. But, this bottom rank was totally forgotten when incentive was given. 4. The importance of mechanic, thus, cannot be ignored. It is first his signature then the signature of engineer and then the work of pilot that makes the aircraft fly. But, this bottom rank was totally forgotten when incentive was given. 4. Thus, the rational of the State in denying incentive to the mechanics has absolutely no basis. It is per se arbitrary and grossly discriminatory. It is time that the State woke up to these realities. It cannot be denied. We are a welfare State and cannot deny or run away from the equality clause. Incentives are for all concerned with the aircraft. The Uttar Pradesh model, which was adopted by the Bihar State, considers all the three branches, that is, the pilot, engineer and the technicians (mechanic) for grant of incentive. No requirement stipulated therein for any mechanic/technician to have any licence. Even here the licence which the State is trying to project is a licence which migrates the mechanic to an engineer. He ceases to be a mechanic or technician. 5. In that view of the matter, I have no option but to allow this writ petition with a direction to the State to consider the matter keeping in view the observations as made above and take a decision with regard to grant of incentive to technician/mechanic, who have no little role to play in matters of keeping the State aircraft in flying condition. 6. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed.