JUDGMENT By Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is a registered association of the employees of Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and it had earlier approached the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 3831 of 1996(R) for directing the respondents to remove the pay anomaly in their pay scales for the post of Pump Operator in the different departments of the Government of Bihar. That writ petition was disposed of without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioners with a direction to the petitioners to file a detailed representation before respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 3 was directed to dispose of the same within specified time. Thereafter, the contempt petition was filed, which was disposed of in view of the fact that the order had been passed by then Finance Secretary respondent no. 3. As such the contempt proceeding was dropped with liberty to challenge the same (Annexure-2 vide order dated 16.09.1998). The petitioner once again preferred a writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 3701 of 1998(R) which was once again disposed of by remanding the matter to the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Jharkhand to look into the matter and pass an order in accordance with law. It was also observed that the government could constitute a similar committee as constituted by the State of Bihar headed by sitting Judge of the Hon'ble Patna High Court, if they so desire. Thereafter, the impugned order contained at Annexure-7 has been passed by the Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi contained in Memo No. 1031 vide order dated 27.02.2004. By the impugned order, the representation of the petitioner for grant of higher scale of pay of Rs. 3050-4590/- and Rs. 3200-4900/- as per the 5th Pay Revision at par with Pump Operators of the Water Resources and Minor Irrigation Department has been rejected. 3. It is contention of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the Pump Operators being the member of petitioner's association have all along been enjoying the same scale of pay since their appointments at par with those of the Minor Irrigation Department at the relevant point of time in the scale of Rs. 375-480/- and Rs. 400-540/-. The employees in the Minor Irrigation Department were also getting the scale of Rs. 375-480/-. 375-480/- and Rs. 400-540/-. The employees in the Minor Irrigation Department were also getting the scale of Rs. 375-480/-. The employees of the Water Resources Department were also getting the pay scale of Rs. 400-540/- & Rs. 375-480/-. However, at the time of pay revision under the 5th Pay Revision Committee recommendation the scale of pay of the members of the petitioner's association was enhanced to Rs. 825-1200/- and Rs. 800-1150/-. However, thereafter the incumbents to the same post in the Minor Irrigation Department and Water Resources Department were given higher scale of pay of Rs. 950-1400/- & Rs. 975-1540/- as their replacement scale on their representation after removal of pay anomaly. The pump operators of PHED Departments were only granted the scale of Rs. 800-1150/- and Rs. 825-1200/-. The grievance of the petitioner is that from the outset there was no difference in their qualification, nature of their duties, scale of pay which they have been enjoying with that of similarly placed employee in the Water Resources and Minor Irrigation Department. However, by the impugned order, the respondent-Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department have denied the same purportedly acting upon the advise of the Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law denying equal treatment to these petitioners with those of similarly situated persons in other department of Government of Jharkhand. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that duty of the pump operators PHED/ Drinking Water and Sanitation Departments are more onerous to their counterpart in the other department. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the question relating to the pay anomaly was considered by the Fitment Appellate Committee constituted by then Government of Bihar. A report of the Fitment Appellate Committee is annexed as Annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2. As per the extracts of the report of the Fitment Appellate Committee, the case of the Pump Operators of the Public Health Engineering Department was considered at para-21.3. It is submitted on his behalf that the Fitment Appellate Committee had discussed the case of the Pump Operator in the Public Heath Engineering Department and also took into account the discussion of the Fitment Committee in their respect as contained in paragraph 34.1, Volume-II of the Report. It is submitted on his behalf that the Fitment Appellate Committee had discussed the case of the Pump Operator in the Public Heath Engineering Department and also took into account the discussion of the Fitment Committee in their respect as contained in paragraph 34.1, Volume-II of the Report. It came to the conclusion that the Pump Operator of PHED Department did not possess the qualification and have been kept at a lower scale of Rs. 2650-4000/-, which is also recorded at 52-III of the 5th Central Pay Commission Report. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Secretary of the department on advise of the Finance Department found that there were difference in the qualification of the members of the petitioner's association i.e. Pump Operator Drinking Water and Sanitation Department and those of the Minor Irrigation and Water Resources Department. It was also found by the Secretary that the Pump Operators in the Kosi Project under Water Resources Department have been getting higher scale of pay even in the earlier pay revision effective from 1.1.1971 and 1.4.1981. Therefore, the distinction between the case of the petitioner and those of other is apparent. It is also submitted that the Secretary of the department of PHED also took into account the recommendation of the fitment appellate committee and found that pump operator of the present department in the scale of Rs.800-1150, 825-1200 have been approved the scale of Rs. 2650-4000 and 3500-4590 i.e. for matric and diploma qualified employees. Whereas the claim of higher scale of Rs.3200-4900 and Rs.4000-6000 has been refused by the appellate committee. In such circumstance, it is submitted that the impugned order does not suffers from any error of law. In the matter of pay fixation the opinion of the expert committee should be accepted who are having expertize in dealing with the matter of pay fixation of the employees of different department taking into account several factors into consideration. 6. I have heard counsel for the parties at length and gone through the relevant materials on record. The petitioner's association is a member of pump operators in the drinking water and sanitation department. Those employees were enjoying the scale of Rs.400-540, 375-480 while those in the minor irrigation were getting a scale of Rs. 375-480 as also those in the water resources department were getting the scale of Rs. 400-540, 375-480. The petitioner's association is a member of pump operators in the drinking water and sanitation department. Those employees were enjoying the scale of Rs.400-540, 375-480 while those in the minor irrigation were getting a scale of Rs. 375-480 as also those in the water resources department were getting the scale of Rs. 400-540, 375-480. The present petitioners , however were aggrieved because the employees of the other two departments were granted replacement scale higher then the pump operator of the drinking water department and they moved this Court earlier in writ petition which has been referred herein above. The matter related to pay anomaly of the employees/ pump operator of the PHED were also under consideration before the fitment appellate committee constituted by the erstwhile State of Bihar for removing anomaly of 5th Pay Revision. It, however appears that the appellate committee after taking into account the discussion made in the meeting of the fitment committee as also the qualification of those pump operator arrived at a conclusion that they had lesser qualification and, therefore, rightly been granted revised scale of Rs. 2500-4000 and Rs.3050-4590 for matriculate as well as diploma trainee. From the statements made on behalf of the respondents it appears that the incumbents i.e. pump operators of the water resources department were also getting the same scale earlier but at the time of consideration of replacement scale have been granted in view of the 5th pay revision the criteria of granting of replacement scale has been changed. At the time of granting of 5th pay revision the earlier principle which were prevalent for granting the revisional pay scale has been replaced taking into account the nature of job, qualification etc. specified for them. The respondents have taken a stand that the tubewell operators in the minor irrigation department were granted higher scale as some of them were holding I.T.I. Certificate also whereas those in the drinking water and sanitation department did not have such qualification. On this ground the distinction has been made relating to the petitioners as compared to other on their qualification. A distinction has also been drawn with respect to the pump operator under Kosi project in water resources department and it has been stated that right from 1.1.1971 they were having higher scale of Rs.240-396 whereas the pump operators of drinking water and sanitation department were getting Rs. 180-240 for the corresponding period. A distinction has also been drawn with respect to the pump operator under Kosi project in water resources department and it has been stated that right from 1.1.1971 they were having higher scale of Rs.240-396 whereas the pump operators of drinking water and sanitation department were getting Rs. 180-240 for the corresponding period. In such background, the fitment appellate committee has considered the grievances of the members of the petitioners' association and disapproved the grant of higher scale equivalent to the replacement scale of the pump operator of the other department. 7. Law in respect of the aforesaid issue is well settled in view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the matter of pay fixation a whole lot of factors are to be taken into account while granting revision in pay scale to one or the other category of employees of different department. Simply comparison of 'reference' scale of one or the other department of the incumbents would not be enough in determining equivalence in pay scale. This issue has also been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal & Another Vrs. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association and others reported in (2010) 5 SCC 225 wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that determination of pay parity is an executive function to be carried out by expert bodies and the burden to prove the disparity in pay is on employee claiming parity. The Court would interfere only where Government decision is patently irrational, unjust or prejudicial. It is further held that a persons claiming parity in pay revision would have to establish that they were entitled to such parity and merely because earlier they were in the same pays scale with the other posts, continuance of same cannot be claimed by them as they have to establish that their duties and function are similar in nature to that of the other posts. 8. In these background, this Court does not find infirmity in the impugned order and there is no reason to interfere in the present writ application which relates to the claim of grant of pay parity in pay scale with other employees. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.