JUDGMENT AND ORDER 1. Heard Shri Th. Khagemba, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri K. Jagat, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuing a direction to the respondents for allowing them to enjoy the benefits of the orders dated 15-10-2010 and 03-06-2011 issued by the Commissioner (Finance) and also the benefits of the order dated 03-06-2011 issued by the Principal Secretary (School Education) revising the scale of pay in respect of regular teacher for the period from the date of commencement of the ROP up to the month of February, 2012. 3.1. Facts of the present case as averred by the petitioners in the writ petition, are that on the recommendation of a DPC, the petitioners along with some other persons were appointed to the posts of Science/Arts Graduate Teachers vide order dated 19-04-2007 issued by the Director of Educations, Government of Manipur and since then, they have been discharging their duties and functions to the full satisfaction of their superior officers. 3.2. While they were working in that capacity, the Commissioner (Finance), Government of Manipur issued an order dated 15-12-2010 granting arrears of pay for six months from 01-10-2009 to 31-03-2010 in two installments - the first installment to be paid on 01-11-2010 and the second installment on 01-06-2011 subject to the conditions mentioned therein. It is clarified therein that arrears of pay shall be only the difference between pre-revised basic pay plus dearness pay and the revised basic pay plus applicable grade pay and the calculation will not include any allowances in both the cases. In continuation of its order dated 15-12-2010, the Commissioner (Finance), Government of Manipur issued another order dated 03-06-2011 granting the second installment of arrears for the months from 01-01-2010 to 31-03-2010 subject to the conditions that in respect of serving employees, the arrears shall be deposited in their respective GPF accounts for a period of six months; that in respect of Government employees retired/expired during the period of three months mentioned above and those covered by the New Pension Scheme, the arrears shall be paid in cash. On the same day i.e., 03-06-2011, the Principal Secretary (School Education), Government of Manipur issued an order revising the scale of pay of different categories of regular teachers under the School Education Department and the entry scale of pay for the category of teachers to which the petitioners belong, was revised at PB-2: Rs.9300-34800 + AGP Rs.3900. The said order dated 03-06-2011 was issued with the concurrence of the Finance Department vide its U.O dated 03-06-2011. 3.3. According to the petitioners, as they were appointed in the year 2007, they were not covered by the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules as adopted by the Government of Manipur namely the Manipur Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2004 and their cases are covered by the Defined Contributory Pension Scheme and therefore, the arrears of pay and allowances of the petitioners for the period i.e., 01-11-2010 to 30-06-2011 should be drawn up by treating them under the category of teachers in terms of condition No. (V) of the said order. Although the petitioners are entitled to the arrears of pay and allowances for the aforesaid period, the respondents have failed to prepare and credit the same to the Accounts of the petitioners in spite of repeated requests being made by them without assigning any reason thereof. Having no other alternative, they submitted a joint representation on 10-09-2013 to the Director of Educations, Government of Manipur praying for allowing them to enjoy the arrears of pay and allowances in view of the said order/ROP and the same is still pending for disposal by the respondents. Hence, the present writ petition is being filed by the petitioners. 4. As usual, the respondents namely the State Government and its officials, have failed to file their affidavit-in-opposition despite a number of opportunities being grated to them by this court and since the averments made in the writ petition are not controverted by them, 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 the cases of Naseem Bano (Smt.) Vs. State of UP & ors. 1993 Suppl. (4) SCC 46; State of Assam Vs. Union of India (2010) 10 SCC 403; Asha Vs. State of UP & ors. 1993 Suppl. (4) SCC 46; State of Assam Vs. Union of India (2010) 10 SCC 403; Asha Vs. PT.B.D. Sharama University of Health Sciences & ors., (2012) 7 SCC 389 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that an averment made in the petition is expected to be specifically denied by the replying party and if there is no specific denial, such averment is deemed to have been admitted by the respondent. 5. The petitioners are all Science Graduate Teachers as is evident from the order dated 19-04-2007 issued by the Director of Educations, Government of Manipur, a copy of which is placed on record by them. Their only grievance is that despite the orders dated 15-12-2010 and 03-06-2011 being issued by the Commissioner (Finance) and 03-06-2011 being issued by the Principal Secretary (School Education), Government of Manipur, the benefits thereof have been denied to them without assigning any reason and their repeated requests including the representation dated 10-09-2013, have fallen on deaf ears of the respondents. On perusal of the said first two Government orders, it appears prima facie that the same would apply to all the employees of the State, including the petitioners subject to the conditions mentioned therein. The State Government being a public institution is expected to act fairly and reasonably. It is the State Government which has issued the said orders and therefore, it ought to have taken requisite steps to ensure that its employees are given the benefits thereof. It is the duty of the State Government to see that its orders are implemented by all concerned in their true spirit, otherwise there is no point of issuing such orders. Any action of the State Government which is unfair and unreasonable, will be rendered violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It further appears that the respondents have failed to discharge their duties in this regard and the callous attitude being shown to by the respondents towards the petitioners is highly unfortunate. On top of that, despite notice being accepted by the learned Government Advocate in the matter as back as on 11-11-2013, the respondents have miserably failed to file their affidavit-in-opposition and have not bothered as if they were not concerned at all in the matter. On top of that, despite notice being accepted by the learned Government Advocate in the matter as back as on 11-11-2013, the respondents have miserably failed to file their affidavit-in-opposition and have not bothered as if they were not concerned at all in the matter. It is the high time for the State Government to apply its mind and see that proper assistance is provided to the court so as to enable the court to decide the issue involved in the matter towards administration of justice in the State. Accountability or a responsibility appears to be a thing of the past in the State of Manipur. Since the respondents have chosen not to contest the instant writ petition, this court has no any other option but to allow the writ petition. 6. As no assistance was forthcoming from the respondents so as to enable this court to decide the issue involved herein, this court vide order dated 19-02-2016 directed the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to file an additional affidavit, as regards the calculation in respect of the difference between the pre-revised basic pay plus dearness pay and the revised basic pay plus applicable grade pay and in compliance therewith, an additional affidavit was filed 07-06-2016 along with Annexure - M/1 to M/3 and as per the calculation shown in the said annexure, the petitioners are entitled to arrears of pay amounting to Rs.1,43,675/-; Rs.1,19,177 and Rs.1,19,177/- respectively. In spite of opportunities being given to the respondents, they have, this time also, failed to file a reply affidavit thereto. 7. For the reasons as stated hereinabove, the instant writ petition is allowed with the following directions: (a) The respondents shall verify, within a period of one month i.e., by 16-09-2016, as to whether the petitioners are entitled to the amounts as mentioned in para [6] above and if it is found that they are entitled to, the same shall be paid to them by 16-10-2016, failing which the said amounts shall carry an interest @ Rs. 9% per annum from 17-10-2016 till the date of payment; (b) On verification and in the event of the petitioners not being found to be entitled to the amounts as mentioned in para [6] above, the respondents shall calculate the arrears of pay of the petitioners in terms of the said three Government orders dated 15-12-2010 & 03-06-2011, within the same time i.e., by 16-09-2016 and the payments thereof shall be made to them by 16-10-2016, failing which the amounts so calculated by the respondents, shall carry an interest @ Rs. 9% per annum from 17-10-2016 till the date of payment; (c) There shall be no order as to costs.