JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—In this bunch of writ petitions, petitioners have rushed to this Court for quashing of the circular letter dated 11.10.2011 issued by Finance Controller, Board of Basic Education, U.P. Allahabad as well as consequential communication issued by respective Finance & Accounts Officer, Basic Education, and further prayer has been made not to take any action on the basis of order impugned and salary be ensured without causing any reduction by effecting recovery therefrom. 2. In order to organize, co-ordinate and control the imparting of basic education and teachers’ training in the State of U.P., the State of U.P. came up with an idea of establishing Board of Basic Education and the matter connected therewith by introducing, U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 34 of 1972). The Board of Basic Eduction has established large number of Junior Basic School/Senior Basic School in the entire State and in the said institution appointment is made initially as Assistant Teacher in Primary Schools and thereafter avenue of promotion has been provided for as Headmaster in Primary School or Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School in consonance with procedure as provided for under U.P. Basic Eduction (Teachers) Service Rules 1981. 3. Each one of the petitioner of present writ petitions have claimed before this Court that their initial engagement has been as Assistant Teachers in Primary Schools falling in their respective districts and thereafter each one of the petitioner has been accorded promotion as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School and has been performing and discharging their duties accordingly. 4. State Government by means of Government Order bearing No. 2-1313/Dus-54 (M)/2008 dated 8.12.2008 notified the decision of the State Government with regard to revision of pay-scales of Government Servants, Government Teacher, Teachers and Employees of aided educational institutions, teachers and employees of technical education as also that of pensioners and family pensioners w.e.f. 1.1.2006. On 8.12.2008 itself another Government Order was issued by the State Government bearing No. 2-1314/Dus-59 (M)/2008 notifying the pay band and the grade pay applicable w.e.f. 1.1.2006 with regard to different existing pay-scales. On 8.12.2008 itself another Government Order was issued by the State Government bearing No. 2-1318/Dus-59 (M)-2008 notifying the procedure and method for actual fixation in the revised pay structure. On 8.12.2008 itself another Government Order was issued by the State Government bearing No. 2-1318/Dus-59 (M)-2008 notifying the procedure and method for actual fixation in the revised pay structure. Paragraph 11 of the Government Order bearing No. 2 1318/Dus-59(M)-2008 dated 8.12.2008 specified the procedure to be followed in fixing salary in case of promotion from one Grade pay to another Grade Pay in the revised pay structure in the case of promotion on 1.1.2006 or subsequent to 1.1.2006. Paragraph-11 of the aforesaid Government Order is being extracted below: Þ11- 1 tuojh 2006 dkas ;k mlds ckn inksUufr ij osru&fu/kZj.k&iqujhf{kr osru lajpuk esa ,d xzsM osru ls nwljs xzsM osru esa inksUufr dh fLFkfr esa osru dk fu/kkZj.k fuEukqlkj fd;k tk;sxk& ¼1½ osru cS.M esa osru rFkk orZeku xzsM osru ds ;ksx dh 3 izfr’kr /kujkf’k dks vxys 10 esa iw.kkZafdr djrs gq, ,d osruo`f) ds :i esa vkxf.kr fd;k tk;sxkA rn~uqlkj vkxf.kr osruo`f) dh /kujkf’k osru cS.M esa izkIr orZeku osru esa tksM+h tk;sxhA bl izdkj izkIr /kujkf’k inksUufr ds in ds osru cS.M esa osru gksxk] ftlds lkFk inksUufr in dk xzsM osru ns; gksxkA tgka inksUufr esa osru cS.M esa ifjorZu gqvk gks ogka Hkh blh i)fr dk ikyu fd;k tk;sxk rFkkfi osruo``f) tksM+us ds ckn Hkh tgka osru cS.M esa vkxf.kr osru inksUufr okys in ds mPp osru cS.M ds U;wure ls de gks rks rn~uqlkj vkxf.kr osru dks mDr osru cS.M esa U;wure ds cjkcj rd d<+k fn;k tk;sxkA** 5. According to paragraph 11 in such cases the fixation on the date of promotion is to be made after adding to pay in the pay band to the grade pay and adding 3% thereof as one increment which was required to be added to the grade pay in the pay band and accordingly the salary payable on promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be determined. On 24.2.2009 the Education Department of the State issued a Government Order specifying the revised pay band and grade pay applicable to different categories of teachers as the revised pay-scale. According to the aforesaid Government order the pay band applicable to Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidyalaya was Rs. 9300-34800 with Rs 4200 being Grade Pay. With regard to Headmaster of Prathmik Vidyalya and Assistant Teacher of Uchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya the pay band stood specified as the same i.e. 9300-34800 with grade pay being specified as Rs. 4600/- 6. According to the aforesaid Government order the pay band applicable to Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidyalaya was Rs. 9300-34800 with Rs 4200 being Grade Pay. With regard to Headmaster of Prathmik Vidyalya and Assistant Teacher of Uchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya the pay band stood specified as the same i.e. 9300-34800 with grade pay being specified as Rs. 4600/- 6. In effecting actual implementation of the aforesaid revised pay structure various anomalies came into existence including an anomaly where the basis shiksha teachers appointed prior to 1.1.2006 on being worked out their salary came to a lower amount than teachers appointed subsequent to 1.1.2006, for removing such anomaly the State Government issued Government Order dated 7.9.2009 notifying the fitment level with regard to different category of cases, said table of different category of teachers run from 57 to 65 of the paper book. Table appended to the said Government Order at page 60 specifies the fitment level for fixation of salary of Head Master of primary school/Assistant Teachers of Uchcha Prathmik Vidylaya in the pay band of Rs. 9300-34800 to be at the level 17140/- and at page 57 fitment level of Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidyalaya has been shown in Pay Band of Rs. 9300-34800/- with Rs. 4200/- Grade Pay and revised basic pay has been shown at the level of Rs. 13,500/-. 7. Petitioner submits that it was in accordance with the aforesaid that the salary of the petitioners was fixed at the level of Rs. 17140/- on the date of grant of their promotion and all payments has been made accordingly. The fixation so effected suffers from no discrepancy and rightful exercise has been so undertaken. 8. On 2.11.2010 a Government Order was issued by the State Government taking objection to the effect that the fixation as directed by Government order dated 7.9.2009 was with regard to personal sanction, selection grade and promotion pay-scale and in cases of grant of actual promotion subsequent on 1.1.2006 the fixation was required to be effected in terms of paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 bearing No. 2-1318/10-59 (M)/2008. On 13.12.2010 another Government Order was issued addressed to the Finance Controller/Basic Shiksha Parishad referring to the demand of Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Sangh and for submitting a report within a period of three days. On 13.12.2010 another Government Order was issued addressed to the Finance Controller/Basic Shiksha Parishad referring to the demand of Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Sangh and for submitting a report within a period of three days. The aforesaid direction has been followed by subsequent directions to similar effect dated 16.9.2011 and thereafter treating the Government Order dated 16.9.2011 as a final decision of the State Government the Finance Controller/Basic Shiksha Parishad issued a circular letter dated 11.10.2011 addressed to all the Finance & Accounts Officer in the State taking objection against the fixation of salary and directing the fixation of salary consequent upon grant of promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be made only in accordance with the paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. It is in pursuance to the aforesaid communication of the Finance Controller dated 11.10.2011 that Finance & Accounts Officer/Basic Shiksha has proceeded to issue communication to all Block Education Officer to take further consequence action. On 25.11.2011 the Finance Controller has submitted his detail report to the State Government pointing out the various anomalies and referring to the Government Order dated 7.9.2009 whereby the fitment table had been notified to overcome such anomalies. 9. Thereafter petitioners are before this Court contending therein that their fixation of salary at the level of Rs. 17,140/- has rightly been made on the date of grant of their promotion and payment has also been made, in such a situation and in this background communication which has been so issued by Finance Controller on 11.10.2011 is based upon a misconstruction of the Government Order dated 16.9.2011 as the Government Order dated 16.9.2011 does not amount to decision of the State Government rescinding the earlier decision notified by the Government Order dated 7.9.2009, in view of this action taken is unjustifiable. 10. Counter-affidavit has been filed in the present case and it has been stated therein that incumbent who have been accorded promotion under policy so formulated there fixation is to be made in consonance with paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 and in view of this incorrect fixation has been made. 10. Counter-affidavit has been filed in the present case and it has been stated therein that incumbent who have been accorded promotion under policy so formulated there fixation is to be made in consonance with paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 and in view of this incorrect fixation has been made. It has also been stated that pursuant to letter which has been so sent on 25.11.2011, the Government Order stands clarified vide Government Order dated 23.12.2011 by mentioning that Þ fdlh laoxZ ds fdlh in ij osru fu/kkZj.k ds QyLo:i fdlh inèkkjd dk osru mDr xzsM osru esa lh/kh HkrhZ ls vkus okys deZpkjh ds fy, fu/kkZfjr U;wure osru esa de gksus ij mlds cjkcj fd;s tkus dh O;oLFkk ugha gSA laoxZ esa ;fn ml xzsM osru ls lh/kh HkrhZ dh O;oLFkk gS vkSj lh/kh HkrhZ ls fu;qDr deZpkjh dk osru mlls ofj"B deZpkjh ls vf/kd fu/kkZfjr gksrk gS rks ml fLFkfr esa ofj"B deZpkjh dk osru dfu"B ds cjkdj fd;k tk ldrk gS fdUrq ;fn laoxZ esa lh/kh HkrhZ dh O;oLFkk ugha gS rks lEcfU/kr deZpkjh dk osru lkh/kh HkrhZ ds fu/kkZfjr osru ds cjkcj fd;s tkus dh O;oLFkk ugha gSAÞ and accordingly petitioners cannot claim for pay-scale and benefit . 11. To this counter-affidavit rejoinder affidavit has been filed and therein Government dated 7.9.2009 has been appended and it has been sought to be contended that interpretation placed upon the Government Order dated 24.2.2009 is not correct and there can be no justification for different principles for fixation of salary to persons appointed by direct recruitment or persons promoted to the same cadre. In any view of the matter there can be no justification for direct recruit to the cadre to be placed on a position better than a promoted employee and paragraph 3 of the Government Order dated 24.2.2009 would demonstrate that the same is making no difference between a direct recruit or a promotee to the post of Assistant Teachers in Senior Basic School. 12. On 7.9.2012 matter had been heard by this Court and further clarification has been asked for, and pursuant to the same, letter of Finance Controller dated 3.7.2012, has been brought on record alongwith letter dated 27.7.2012 and both the letters are clarificatory in nature. 13. After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged all the writ petitions have been taken up for final hearing and disposal and Civil Misc. 13. After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged all the writ petitions have been taken up for final hearing and disposal and Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 75907 of 2011 is being treated as leading writ petition. 14. Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, Advocate submits that in the present case rightful fixation has been done in favour of petitioners at the level of Rs. 17140/- at the date of grant of their promotion, as per fitment table of Government Order dated 7.9.2009 and objection of State Government that fixation as directed by the Government Order dated 7.9.2009 was with regard to personal sanction, selection grade and promotion pay-scale, and in cases of grant of actual promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006, the fixation was required to be effected in terms of paragraph 11 of Government Order dated 8.12.2008, is totally miscontruction of the Government Order and such construction would give rise to various anomalies, in the matter of fixation of pay-scale and further different pay-scale would be admissible to incumbents, based on source of recruitment, which is totally contrary to the dictum of equal pay for equal work, in view of the same action so taken cannot be subscribed any means. 15. Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, further tried to submits that apparent disparity would occur for the simple reason that under U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules 1981, it is true that direct recruitment takes place only at the stage of Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic Schools and that no direct recruitment of Assistant Teachers takes place at Senior Basic Schools but under Rule 5 of 1981, Rules in case no eligible candidate is available for being promoted to the post then said post are to be filled up by direct recruitment in terms of Rule 15 of 1981 Rules and large number of direct recruitment have been made to the post of Assistant Teachers in Senior Basic School and accordingly incumbents recruited by direct recruitment would be on better position on monetary front than the promoted incumbents and such anomaly creates class amongst class vis-a-vis similarly situated Assistant teachers of Senior Basic School. Coupled with this, as of date, on 31.8.2012 in U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules 1981, amendment has been introduced, known as U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service (Fifteen Amendment) Rules 2012 and therein Rule 5 has been amended and as per the same in reference of Assistant Teachers at Senior Basic Schools in reference of Science/Maths Teacher, 50% vacancies are to be filled up by way of direct recruitment and 50% by way of promotion, as provided in Rules 15 and 18 respectively, and accordingly, based on source of recruitment, there will be apparent disparity in pay-scale. Reference has also been given of the teachers appointed in recognized institution run and managed by private management by submitting that therein under U.P. Recognized Basic Schools (JHS) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and other Conditions) Rules 1978 there is no avenue for according promotion and all the posts are to be filled up way of direct recruitment and qua them at the entry point there would be different pay-scale and petitioners who are also teachers similar to the said teachers, and performing and functions by way of promotion would be on lower pay-scale as such apparent conflict is there. In view of this matter requires redressal in stead of shutting the doors and accordingly writ petitions deserve to be allowed. 16. Countering the said submission, Sri J.N. Maurya, Advocate has submitted that under U.P. Basic Education Teachers Service Rules 1981, initial engagement is made in Junior Basic School as Assistant Teacher and then avenue provided for is by way promotion on the post of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School and only in exceptional circumstances in case there are no teachers available process is to be undertaken by way of direct recruitment and in case there is any disparity then under Government Order remedial measure has been provided for in view of this request as has been made by the petitioners cannot be accepted and their fixation has to be made as per Paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 and claim of petitioners is not at all covered under Government Order dated 7.9.2009, and till today petitioners have not given single instance where junior has been paid more salary than them as such writ petition in question deserves to be dismissed. 17. 17. After respective arguments have been advanced factual situation which has so emerged in the present case is that each one of the petitioners have been functioning as Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School and thereafter with the passage of time each one of the petitioners have been accorded promotion after 1.1.2006 and have been functioning in Senior Basic School. 18. State Government by means of Government Order dated 8.12.2008 resolved for revision of pay-scales of Government Servants, Government Teacher, Teachers and Employees of aided educational institutions, teachers and employees of technical education as also pensioners and family pensioners w.e.f. 1.1.2006. In paragraph 10 it was mentioned that in revised pay structure benefit would be admission on pay Band and Grade Pay w.e.f. 1.1.2006 or from the date of option. On the same date another Government Order dated 8.12.2008 was issued by the State Government notifying the pay band and the grade pay applicable w.e.f. 1.1.2006 with regard to different existing pay-scales. On same date another Government Order dated 8.12.2008 was issued by the State Government notifying the procedure and method for actual fixation in the revised pay structure. Therein clearly it has been provided for, that all those employees who are full time employee, as on 1.1.2006, their salary shall be fixed in terms of the aforesaid order. In paragraph 1 itself, in addition to it, it was mentioned, that all those employees who on 1.1.2006 and on the date of issuance of Government Order, in between had been accorded promotion, conferred the benefit of time scale/selection grade and on account of the same are in higher pay-scale, the said Government Servant, is entitled to furnish option for getting/opting revised pay structure. Paragraph 5 deals with fixation of initial salary in the revised pay structure. Paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 specifically specified the procedure to be adhered to in fixing salary in case of promotion from one Grade pay to another Grade Pay in the revised pay structure in the case of promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006. In such cases the fixation was to be made after adding to pay in the pay band to the grade pay and adding 3% thereof as one increment which was required to be added to the grade pay in the pay band and accordingly the salary payable on promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be determined. In such cases the fixation was to be made after adding to pay in the pay band to the grade pay and adding 3% thereof as one increment which was required to be added to the grade pay in the pay band and accordingly the salary payable on promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be determined. On 24.2.2009 the Education Department of the State issued a Government Order specifying the revised pay band and grade pay applicable to different categories of teachers as the revised pay-scale. According to the aforesaid Government order the pay band applicable to Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidyalaya was Rs. 9300-34800 with Rs. 4200 being Grade Pay. With regard to Headmaster of Prathmik Vidyalya and Assistant Teacher of Uchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya the pay band stood specified as the same i.e. 9300-34800 with grade pay being specified as Rs. 4600/- . 19. In effectuating actual implementation of the aforesaid revised pay structure various anomalies came into existence, and one such major anomaly was, that on fixation being made under Government Order dated 8.12.2008, various instances have been revealed, wherein various teachers who have been appointed prior to 1.1.2006, their salary was less, as compared to teachers who have been appointed after 1.1.2006, and for removing the aforesaid anomaly, the fixation was to be made notionally, as per the fitment schedule, and benefit of the same was to be extended w.e.f. 1.12.2008, in consonance with the criteria provided for, in Government Order 24.2.2009. 20. Table appended to the said Government Order dated 7.9.2009 specifies the fitment level for fixation of salary of Head Master of primary school/Assistant Teacher of Uchcha Prathmik Vidylaya in the pay band of Rs. 9300-34800 to be at the level 17140/- It was in accordance with the aforesaid that the salary of the petitioners was fixed at the level of Rs. 17140/- on the date of grant of their promotion and all payments have been made accordingly. On 2.11.2010 a Government Order was issued by the State Government taking objection to the effect that the fixation as directed by Government order dated 7.9.2009 was with regard to personal sanction, selection grade and promotion pay-scale and in cases of grant of actual promotion subsequent on 1.1.2006 the fixation was required to be effected in terms of paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. On 13.12.2010 another Government Order was issued addressed to the Finance Controller/Basic Shiksha Parishad referring to the demand of Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Sangh and for submitting a report within a period of three days. Thereafter as various queries were being made, the Government Order on 16.9.2011 addressed letter to the Finance Controller, mentioning therein that in cases of actual promotion, fixation of pay has to be made as per paragraph 11 of Government Order dated 8.12.2008 and as regards fixation of higher pay-scale in consonance of Government Order dated 24.2.2009, criteria has been specified in paragraph 4. The Finance Controller/Basic Shiksha Parishad issued a circular letter dated 11.10.2011 based on Government Order dated 16.092.011 addressed to all the Finance & Accounts Officer in the State taking objection against the fixation of salary and directing the fixation of salary consequent upon grant of promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be made only in accordance with the paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. Thereafter pursuant to letter dated 25.11.2011 sent by Finance Controller, the State Government on 23.12.2011 has clarified the said situation and on 3rd July 2012 as well as 27th July, 2012 Finance Controller based at the office of Basic Education has once again proceeded to clarify the situation. 21. This much has been accepted by the petitioners that under Government Order dated 8.12.2008 as per paragraph 11 specific procedure has been provided for to be followed in fixation of salary, in case of promotion from one Grade Pay to another Grade Pay in the revised pay structure, in case promotion has been made subsequent to 1.1.2006 and in paragraph 5, the way and manner initial salary in revised pay structure is to be determined has been provided for, as on 1.1.2006 . 22. According to paragraph 11, in such cases the fixation on the date of promotion was to be made after adding to pay in the pay band to the grade pay and adding 3% there of as one increment, which was required to be added to the grade pay in the pay band and accordingly the salary payable on promotion subsequent to 1.1.2006 was to be determined. Petitioners have been accorded promotion after 1.1.2006 and accordingly fixation was required to be made in consonance with the criteria prescribed under Paragraph 11 of Government Order dated 8.12.2008, but in stead of proceeding to make fixation of salary in the said direction, as on 24.2.2009 Education Department of the State Government came up with revised pay band and grade pay applicable to different categories of teachers as the revised pay-scale and with regard to Headmaster of Prathmik Vidyalaya and Assistant Teacher of Uchcha Prathmik Vidayalaya, the pay band has been specified as Rs. 9300-34800, with grade pay being specified as Rs. 4600/- In implementation of revised pay structure various anomalies came into existence including an anomaly where the fixation so effected, came on lower side, vis-a-vis teacher appointed prior to 1.1.2006 and teachers appointed subsequent to 1.1.2006, and for removing such anomaly, the State Government issued Government Order dated 7.9.2009, notifying the fitment level with regard to different category of cases. 23. As per said fitment schedule in reference of Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidyalaya, the Pay Band was Rs. 9300-34800/-, with Rs. 4200/- being the Grade Pay and in reference to the Headmaster of Primary School/Assistant Teacher of Senior Basic School, Grade III and Grade pay of Rs. 4600/- has been fixed and pay band of Rs. 12540 has been shown and revised pay has been fixed as Rs. 17140/- 24. Qua petitioners fixation has been made purportedly in consonance with Government Order dated 24.2.2009 and 7.9.2009 and salary has been filed at the level of Rs. 17140/- and thereafter issues have been sought to be raised that it is not at all in consonance with the provision as contained in Paragraph-11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008, as such same is incorrect fixation and other provisions of Government Order has been ignored, whereas it is a composite scheme. 25. Government Order dated 7.9.2009 has been introduced, with the object to remove anomaly, wherein on fixation being made in consonance of Government Order dated 8.12.2008, situation has emerged wherein incumbent who have been appointed subsequent to 1.1.2006, their salary was on higher side, as compared to teacher appointed prior to 1.1.2006, and for removing such anomaly, fitment schedule had been published. Claim of the petitioners is not at all covered under the same rather in consonance with the Government Order dated 8.12.2008, at page 28 of the paper book, in revised pay structure, qua Pay Band and Grade Pay fixation was to be made as on 1.1.2006. The first fixation, after revision of pay was to be made w.e.f. 1.1.2006 or any date opted for. Petitioners have not at all opted for any other date, as such first fixation, under revised pay structure has to be made on 1.1.2006, as per Government Order dated 8.12.2008, paragraph 5 at page 40 of paper book, and thereafter where promotion has been accorded on 1.1.2006 or onwards the same is specifically covered under paragraph-11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008 as it is a case of promotion from one Grade Pay to another Grade Pay after 1.1.2006 then fixation was to be made in consonance with the provision as contained under Government Order dated 8.12.2008. 26. In the present case as on 1.1.2006, fixation of salary has to be made, as per the fitment schedule, based on Pay Band as well as Grade Pay, and on the relevant date petitioners have been functioning as Assistant Teachers of Prathmik Vidayala and accordingly, fixation has to be made on the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- and thereafter as promotion has been accorded after 1.1.2006, the fixation thereafter has to be governed as per Paragraph-11 of Government Order dated 8.12.2008, wherein all together separate procedure has been provided for, fixation of pay qua promotional exercise undertaken after 1.1.2006. Here straightway, on the Pay Band of Rs. 9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-with revised basic pay of Rs. 17,140/- fixation has been made and such situation has been remedied by the authorities concerned as it was case of wrong fixation. The letter of Finance Controller dated 3.7.2012, as well as 27.7.2012, taking into account, the Government Order 7.9.2009, have proceeded to clarify the situation. Coupled with this in the affidavit filed, in paragraph 10, categorical averment has been mentioned, that in reference of petitioners, on Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- fixation has been made, as per fitment schedule dated 7.9.2009, and thereafter on promotion being accorded after 1.1.2006 from one Grade Pay to another Grade Pay, then fixation is required to be done as per Paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. 27. 4200/- fixation has been made, as per fitment schedule dated 7.9.2009, and thereafter on promotion being accorded after 1.1.2006 from one Grade Pay to another Grade Pay, then fixation is required to be done as per Paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. 27. Whatever slight doubt has been there, same has further been clarified by the State Government on 2.11.2010 and 16.9.2011 clearly stating that Government Order dated 7.9.2009 was not at all applicable or attracted in the matter of actual promotions and same was with regard to personal sanction, selection grade and promotion pay-scale and in the matter of actual promotion, fixation was required to be done as per Paragraph 11 of the Government Order dated 8.12.2008. Not only this, pursuant to letter dated 25.11.2011 of Finance Controller, State Government on 23.12.2011 has clarified the situation, by providing that in respect of there being disparity in pay-scale when salary of incumbent recruited by direct recruitment is more than senior incumbent, then salary of senior employee has to be equalised. Cases of promotion and direct recruitment have been dealt with separately, and in case of apparent disparity substantiated, remedial measure and action to be taken has also been provided for. 28. Much emphasis has been laid by the petitioners on the fact that various teachers who have been appointed directly under the proviso of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules 1981 their fixation of salary will be made in consonance with the fitment schedule and as such petitioners would be on lower fitment qua the directly recruited teachers. 29. Counter-affidavit has been filed and therein specific stand has been taken that exercise of appointing teacher by way of direct recruitment has been taken during the period 1989 to 1994 and as far as said category of teachers are concerned at no point of time said teachers have been accorded pay-scale higher qua the teachers regularly appointed. Qua the said specific statement of that mentioned, no specific instance of disparity has been shown, as such issue raised is neither here nor there 30. Qua the said specific statement of that mentioned, no specific instance of disparity has been shown, as such issue raised is neither here nor there 30. Petitioners have tried to claim parity with the teachers appointed under the provision U.P. Recognized Basic (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Condition of the Service of Teachers) Rules 1978 and submits that all these teachers who have been appointed after 1.1.2006 under the aforementioned Rules would get different salary whereas they are also performing same nature of duties. 31. Parity in such matter cannot be claimed as a matter of right for the simple reason that fixation of pay-scale etc. is an action of expert body which has proceeded to determine the pay-scale dependant on various factor and upon the resource of the Government. 32. In the case of Secretary, Finance Department and others v. West Bengal Registration Service Association and others, AIR 1992 SC 1203 the Apex Court held that equation of posts and determination of pay-scales is the primary function of the executive and not the judiciary and, therefore, ordinarily Courts will not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to expert bodies like the Pay Commissions, etc. It does not mean that the Court has no jurisdiction and the aggrieved employees have no remedy if they are unjustly treated by arbitrary State action or inaction. Courts must, however, realise that job evaluation is both a difficult and time consuming task which even expert bodies having the assistance of staff with requisite expertise have found difficult to undertake, sometimes on account of want of relevant data and scales for evaluating performance of different groups of employees. This would call for a constant study of the external comparisons and internal relativities on account of the changing nature of job requirements. Some of the factors which have to be kept in view for job evaluation may include (i) the work programme of his department, (ii) the nature of contribution expected of him (iii) the extent of his responsibility and accountability in the discharge of his diverse duties and functions, (iv) the extent and nature of freedoms/limitations available or imposed on him in the discharge of his duties, (v) the extent of powers vested in him, (vi) the extent of his dependence on superiors for the exercise of his powers,, (vii) the need to coordinate with other departments, etc. 33. 33. The Court further says that a pay structure is evolved normally keeping in mind several factors, like, (i) method of recruitment, (ii) level at which recruitment is made, (iii) the hierarchy of service in a given cadre, (iv) minimum educational/technical qualifications required, (v) avenues of promotion, (vi) the nature of duties and responsibilities, (vii) the horizontal and vertical relativities with similar jobs, (viii) public dealings, (ix) satisfaction level, (x) employer’s capacity to pay, etc. The list is not exhaustive but illustrative. 34. Apex Court in the case of S.C. Chandra and others v. State of Jharkhand and others, 2007 (8) SCC 279 has proceeded to mention that when parity in the pay-scale has been claimed then determination of complete and wholesale identity between two groups has to be examined and grant of pay-scales is a purely executive function and court should be loath to interfere with the same and the proper forum to examine the same is an expert body or committee. 35. Apex Court once again in the case of State of Bihar and others v. Bihar Verterinary Association and others, 2008 (11) SCC 60 has proceeded to mention that determination of pay-scales inter alia depends upon resources of the Government concerned and the resources of Government is not necessarily the same as that of Central Government employees or any other State Government, and even if State Government has taken decision in principle to adopt payment of Central Government, and Fitment Committee was constituted for the said purpose, then decision taken cannot be faulted whereof after due consideration decision has been taken by fitment committee then Court ordinarily should not interfere, and such matters recommended by expert body having financial implication should be respected. 36. Once qua incumbents who have been promoted after 1.1.2006 when different criteria has been fixed for fixation of their pay-scale and in order to remove anomalies/disparity, decision has been taken in respect of teacher who have been appointed prior to 1.1.2006 and their salary is less as compared to teachers appointed after 1.1.2006 by providing for fitment schedule then in view of this based on the same petitioners cannot claim as matter of right that their pay-scale be fixed on the basis of notional fitment schedule. In view of this parity as has been claimed qua teachers appointed under U.P. Recognized Basic (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Condition of the Service of Teachers) Rules 1978 and qua the teachers who have been appointed in exercise of authority vested under the provision of Rule 5 of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules 1981 is neither here nor there and here expert body has taken decision in respect of ensuring pay-scale to the promotees who have been promoted after 1.1.2006 as per procedure prescribed in Paragraph 11 then petitioners legitimately can have no grievance. 37. Petitioners have contended that now, after introducing of 15th amendment in recruitment Rules 1981, even direct recruitment is feasible, and as such in future the incumbents would be appointed with different higher pay-scale, and as such there would be apparent disparity. Interest of petitioners stands fully protected as Government Order dated 23.12.2011 clearly proceeds to mention that if salary of an incumbent directly appointed is higher than the salary of senior, then seniors salary has to be equalized. More over in the entire pleadings, specific instances have not at all been given, which could indicate and substantiate anomalies/disparity rather it has been mentioned that strange situation would occur, if such a construction is given. 38. Petitioners have placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the cases of M/s Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co. Ltd. v. Audrey D’Costa and another, (1987) 2 SCC 469 ; United Bank of India v. Meenakshi Sundaram and others, (1998) 2 SCC 609 ; Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan v. Rajesh Mohan Shukla and others, (2007) 6 SCC 9 and Gurcharan Singh Grewal and another v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others, (2009) 3 SCC 94. 39. In the case of M/s Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co. Ltd. v. Audrey D’Costa and another, (1987) 2 SCC 469 , Apex Court has considered the matter on the parameter of Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, holding that exemption of the Act cannot be claimed by employer on the ground of financial incapability of the management of the State. In the said case wages claimed had been denied on the ground of male and female thus discrimination was being practised on the basis of gender in view of this Apex Court has proceeded to accept on the principal that when there is work of similar nature being performed then remuneration be accorded accordingly. 40. In the said case wages claimed had been denied on the ground of male and female thus discrimination was being practised on the basis of gender in view of this Apex Court has proceeded to accept on the principal that when there is work of similar nature being performed then remuneration be accorded accordingly. 40. In the case of United Bank of India v. Meenakshi Sundaram and others, (1998) 2 SCC 609 Apex Court has approved of additional incentives to be accorded to all the officers of the Bank posted in the North Eastern region as compared to local. 41. In the case of Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan v. Rajesh Mohan Shukla and others, (2007) 6 SCC 9 Apex Court did not approve of discrimination based on the sources of recruitment. 42. In the case of Gurcharan Singh Grewal and another v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others, (2009) 3 SCC 94 Apex Court has taken the view that if there is anomaly, then said anomaly has to be removed and senior cannot be paid less than the junior even if senior’s pay is due to difference of incremental benefits and in the said case directives have been issued to ensure payment with reference to higher pay of junior. 43. Proposition of law laid down in the judgments cited above cannot be disputed but here in the present case factual situation is altogether different as here in respect of incumbents who have been accorded promotion, a different parameter has been provided for in the matters of fixation of salary and as wrong fixation has been made the situation has been remedied, and further in a situation where seniors salary is less, as compared to junior then same has to be equalized. 44. Petitioners have tried to contend before this Court that amount in question shall not be recovered from them. 45. Recently Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 5899 of 2012 (Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others v. State of Uttarakhand and others) decided on 17.8.2012, has considered the earlier view of Apex Court that in case there is no fraud or misrepresentation then amount could not be recovered. 45. Recently Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 5899 of 2012 (Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others v. State of Uttarakhand and others) decided on 17.8.2012, has considered the earlier view of Apex Court that in case there is no fraud or misrepresentation then amount could not be recovered. Apex Court has now reversed the earlier decision and the said point of view and has taken the view that where payment of amount due to wrong fixation of 5th and 6th pay-scale of teachers/principals based on the 5th Pay Commission Report has been made then any amount paid and received without any authority of law, except for few instances as has been pointed out in the cases of Syed Abdul Qadir case (supra) and in Col. B.J. Akkara (retd.) case (supra), the excess payment made due to wrong/irregular pay fixation can always be recovered failing which it would amount to unjust enrichment. 46. In view of this petitioners legitimately can have no grievance whatsoever. 47. Consequently, all the writ petitions are dismissed. ——————