JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Shri Th. Khagemba, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri K. Jagat, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and Shri K.R. Pamei, Advocate on behalf of Shri S. Rupachandra, the learned ASG appearing for the respondent No. 3. 2. By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity and correctness of the impugned Government order dated 05-04-2013 with a prayer that the same be quashed and the respondents be directed to give the benefits of Senior Scale of Pay of Headmaster, Primary School to the petitioner with effect from 01-04-2003. 3.1. Facts as averred by the petitioner in the writ petition, are that although he was initially appointed as Substitute Teacher, his service was regularized vide order dated 16-12-1978 issued by the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur. After having served for more than 10 years as teacher, he was allowed to take charge of Headmaster, Mayai Turel Ahanbi Primary Madrasa on in-charge basis vide order dated 08-01-1991 issued by the I/C Inspector of Schools and moreover, he was allowed to enjoy the Under-Graduate Senior Scale of Pay also. While the petitioner was serving in that capacity, a writ petition being C.R. No. 28 of 1983 came to be filed by an association namely The Manipur JB/Primary/ME School Headmaster’s Welfare Association, whose members are similarly situated with the petitioner, questioning the order dated 08-11-1982 by which the State Government appointed 102 (one hundred and two) Headmasters by absorption. The said writ petition was disposed of on 21-09-1989 by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court directing the respondents therein that the said order dated 08-11-1982 should not displace or disturb any member of the petitioner’s Association. Thereafter, the petitioner along with six other incumbents filed a writ petition being C.R. No. 1001 of 1996 praying for grant of similar relief which was disposed of on 03-04-1997 with the direction that if the petitioners were found similarly situated, such benefit might be extended to them. Thereafter, the petitioner along with six other incumbents filed a writ petition being C.R. No. 1001 of 1996 praying for grant of similar relief which was disposed of on 03-04-1997 with the direction that if the petitioners were found similarly situated, such benefit might be extended to them. Since the respondents therein failed to comply with the order dated 03-04-1997, a contempt petition being C.C.(C) No. 249 of 1998 was filed and in the teeth of contempt proceeding, the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur issued an order dated 22-01-1999 by which the petitioners were declared as Headmasters of Primary/LP School, followed by an order dated 11-06-1999 declaring them as Headmasters with effect from the date of their declaration as Headmaster-in-charge in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2300 (pre-revised). On the basis of a letter dated 12-02-2002 of the Zonal Education Officer, Thoubal, the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur issued an order dated 09-04-2003 modifying the earlier order dated 11-06-1999 to the extent that the petitioner be declared as Headmaster w.e.f. 01-04-1991. 3.2. Even though the petitioner had served as Headmaster for than 12 years, he was not allowed to enjoy the benefits of Senior Scale of Pay of Headmaster and therefore, he was compelled to file a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 165 of 2011 praying for a direction to the respondents to pay him Senior Scale of Pay of Headmaster (Private School) w.e.f. 01-04-2003 which was disposed of on 07-09-2011 directing the respondents therein to consider the case of the petitioner. Before the said court’s order being implemented, the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation vide order dated 05-05-2012 issued by the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur. After a purported compliance with the court’s order, the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur issued the impugned order dated 05-04-2013 denying the petitioner from enjoying the benefits of Senior Scale of Pay attached to the Headmaster, Primary School w.e.f. 01-04-2003 on the ground that the petitioner was not appointed as Headmaster, Primary School on the recommendation of a DPC but had been appointed as Headmaster, Primary School in compliance with the order dated 03-04-1997 passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench in C.R. No. 1001 of 1996. 4. 4. As usual, the State respondents have failed to file an affidavit-in-opposition in the matter, despite a number of opportunities being granted to them by this court and since the averments made in the instant writ petition have not been controverted by the State respondents, the same shall be deemed to have been admitted by them in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a catena of decisions. However, an affidavit on behalf of the respondent No. 3, the Accountant General, Manipur has been filed taking a stand that since the State Government is the administrative authority, the Office of the Accountant General simply implements the decision taken by it in various issues relating to maintenance of GPF, pension and Gazetted entitlement etc. 5. It has been submitted by Shri Th. Khagemba, the learned appearing for the petitioner that the issue involved herein is covered by the judgment and order dated 27-04-2012 passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench in W.P.(C) No. 750 of 2010 wherein it has been held that the declaration of the petitioners therein as Headmasters, JB/Primary School with retrospective effect in accordance with the findings of the court, cannot be construed to be grant of promotion, pay revision or creation of post which would require concurrence of the Finance Department nor can it be construed to be the regularization to the post of Headmasters held by them without the recommendation of the DPC. The relevant paras of the said judgment and order dated 27-04-2012 are reproduced herein below: “6. Undoubtedly, the petitioners are members of the association, which filed Civil Rule No. 28 of 1983 and that they were among the senior-most Assistant Teachers of their respective Schools, whose names found a place in the order dated 05-05-1990 and 05-09-1991 who were declared as Head Master with effect from the dates on which they had been declared as Head Master-in-charge, and were allowed to enjoy the pay scale of Rs. 640-1410/- or Rs.1,650-2,570/ (Pre-revised) with effect from 03-09-1982 or from the date of their declaration as Head Master-in-charge and that they were declared as Head Masters with effect from different dates between 30-10-1980 and 14-02-1985 with the pay scale of Rs. 640-1,410/- or Rs. 1,650-2,570/-. The senior scale of Head Master of JB/Primary School as per the Manipur Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1999 is Rs. 640-1,410/- or Rs. 1,650-2,570/-. The senior scale of Head Master of JB/Primary School as per the Manipur Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1999 is Rs. 6,500-10,500/- if he has completed 12 years of regular service in the grade. As the petitioners have already completed 12 years of regular service from the date of their respective declaration as Head Masters, they are prima facie entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500/-. The only contention of the respondent No. 3 is that in terms of the letter dated 25-02-2006 issued by the Government of Manipur, the related pay scales of Head Master of JB/Primary Schools should be granted only to those who were promoted on the recommendation of a duly constituted DPC, but vide the order dated 05-05-1990 and 05-09-1991, they were allowed to enjoy the pay scale of Head master of JB/Primary Schools retrospectively without the recommendation of DPC and without the concurrence of the Finance Department as required by law. According to them, Rule 42-A of the General Financial Rules, 1963 (Rule 267 of GFR 2005) read with the Office Memorandum dated 10-10-2005 issued by the Government of Manipur in the Finance Department says that all cases of grant of promotions, pay revisions and creation of posts with retrospective effect issued by the Administrative Department and their subordinate offices without obtaining the prior concurrence of the Finance Department as required under the existing rules, etc. are illegal and void ab initio in all respects. It is, therefore, submitted by the answering respondent that he impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity calling for the interference of this Court. The soundness of this contention is to be examined. 7. In the decision of this Court referred to earlier, this Court made it amply clear that there had been separate pay scale for the Head Master of JB/Primary Schools and that the said post of Head Master was a non-selection post and the senior most teacher was declared as Head Master of the respective Schools and that there was definitely a genuine apprehension in the mind of the existing Head Master (member of the petitioner-association) that they might be reverted to the posts of Assistant Teacher of the concerned schools if the impugned order was given effect to. In the absence challenge to these findings, they have not attained finality, and cannot be questioned in this writ petition. In the absence challenge to these findings, they have not attained finality, and cannot be questioned in this writ petition. The principles of res judicata/constructive res judicata will, in proprio vigour, apply in this case. In deference to and consistent with the findings of this Court in the aforesaid Civil Rule, the respondent No. 2 issued the orders dated 05-05-1990 and 05-09-1991 declaring the petitioners as Head Master of the schools in question with retrospective effect in the pay scale of Head Master of JB School i.e., Rs. 640-1,410/- (pre-revised). As the petitioners have completed more than 12 years of regular service in the grade of Head Master of JB/Primary School, they are entitled to the senior scale of Head Master of J.B./Primary School i.e., Rs. 6,500-10,500/-. The impugned order cannot go behind the orders dated 05-05-1990 and 05-09-1991, which are based on the decision of this Court, which has now attained finality. In my opinion, the declaration of the petitioners as Head Master of JB/Primary Schools with retrospective effect in accordance with the findings of this Court cannot be construed to be grant of promotion, pay revision or creation of post, which would require concurrence of the Finance Department nor can it construe to be regularization of the post of Head Masters held by the petitioners without the recommendation of DPC. In the view that I have taken, the impugned order dated 25-02-2006 cannot be sustained in law, and is liable to be set aside. 6. On perusal of the said judgment and order dated 27-04-2012, the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appears to have some considerable force and the issue involved herein is covered by the sad judgment and order. It may be noted that the said judgment and order dated 27-04-2012 was passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench prior to the issuance of the impugned order dated 05-04-2013 by the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur. The Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur was already aware of the said judgment and order dated 27-04-2012 being passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench. The Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur was already aware of the said judgment and order dated 27-04-2012 being passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench. The fact that the impugned order was issued on 05-04-2013 after the existence of the said judgment and order which was passed in a writ petition in which the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur itself was the respondent No. 2, shows that the impugned order was issued without application of mind and in fact, there was no need of issuing it when the issue had already been decided by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench in an identical case. The actions of the State respondents appear to have been taken deliberately so as to deny the petitioner from enjoying the benefits of Senior Scale of Pay. In view of the above, the instant writ petition deserves to be allowed by this court. 7. For the reasons as stated herein above, the instant writ petition is allowed and consequently, the impugned order dated 05-04-2013 issued by the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur is quashed and set aside with the following directions: (a) The respondents shall pay to the petitioner the benefits of Senior Scale of Pay attached to Headmaster, Primary School with effect from 01-04-2003 till the date of retirement on or before 30-11-2016; (b) The respondents shall calculate the petitioner’s pension on the basis of the said Senior Scale of Pay and pay the same to him regularly; (c) The respondents shall pay to the petitioner his arrear of pension on or before 31-12-2016, failing which it will carry an interest @ Rs. 9% per annum with effect from 01-01-2017 till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs.