ORDER : 1. Heard Mrs. Jai Prakash Jha, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Altaf Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs.Chandra Prabha, learned S.C. IV assisted by Mr. Rohit, learned A.C. to S.C. IV appearing for the Respondent-State, Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents-Vinoba Bhave University as well as Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents-Sido Kanhu Murmu University. 2. In the accompanied writ application, the petitioners, who are working as Inspector of Colleges, have prayed for a direction upon the respondents for grant of pay-scale at par with the Registrar of the University i.e. from the existing scale of Rs.3700-5000/-to the scale of Rs.16,400-22,400 with effect from 01.01.1996, which has been allowed to the Registrars of the Universities with effect from 01.01.1996 and for payment difference of arrears of salary. 3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts, as has been disclosed in the writ application, in a nutshell, is that the petitioner nos. 1 and 4 have been working on the post of Inspector of Colleges under the Vinoba Bhave University and so far as the petitioner nos. 2 and 5 are concerned, they are working in the Sidhu Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka and the petitioner nos. 3 and 6 have been working under the Ranchi University. All the petitioners were appointed as Inspector of Colleges on the basis of the recommendation of the JPSC. The pay-scale of the petitioner has been revised with effect from 01.01.1986 and in the pay revision chart at serial No. 1, the pay-scale of Registrar and Inspector of Colleges was revised from Rs.1900-2500/-to Rs.3700-5,000/-. It has been averred in the writ application that since the posts of Registrar and Inspector of Colleges is interchangeable being equivalent, the Registrar of the Ranchi University has been transferred to Magadh University on the post of Inspector of Colleges, which is an equivalent post. It has further been averred in the writ application that as per the statute of the University, the qualification and pay scales of various posts are filled by the University by direct recruitment conducted through all India advertisement of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission. It has further been averred in the writ application that as per the statute of the University, the qualification and pay scales of various posts are filled by the University by direct recruitment conducted through all India advertisement of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission. The qualification for the posts of Registrar of the University and Inspector of the Colleges are exactly same but the Government of Jharkhand, Department of Human Resource Development and Higher Education has revised the pay scale of the Registrar, Controller of Examination and the Finance Officer, whereas, the pay-scale of the Inspector of colleges have not been revised, as evident from Annnexure-5. As per the Resolution of the Syndicate of the Vinoba Bhave University, the Inspector of Colleges should also be given the scale of University Professor, as evident from Annexure-6 to the writ application. It is also evident that the respondent nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 vide Annexure-7 and 7/A of the writ application has made request to the State for revision of the pay-scale of the Inspector of Colleges at par with Registrar of the University. The petitioners have also made several representations to the respondents vide Annexure-8 and 8/A of the writ application for revision of pay-scale at par with the Registrar of the University and due to inaction on the part of the respondent-State, the petitioners left with no alternative, have been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of their grievances. 4. Mr. Jai Prakash Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners has strenuously submitted that though the posts of the Inspector of Colleges and the Registrar of the University have been treated to be equivalent. But due to inexplicable reasons, the salary for the post of Inspector of Colleges has not been revised, though the respective Universities have made a request to the Government for granting the same scale of pay. Learned senior counsel further submits that though the grant of pay-scale is the exclusive domain of the Executive, but, in case of discrimination, this Court can exercise the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned senior counsel further submits that though the grant of pay-scale is the exclusive domain of the Executive, but, in case of discrimination, this Court can exercise the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the instant case, it appears that the pay-scale of the Registrar of the University as well as the Inspector of Colleges are supposed to be the same scale of pay, but, unfortunately pay of Inspector of Colleges have not been revised. Learned senior counsel further submits that the action of the respondents is in the teeth of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, therefore, the Inspector of Colleges are entitled to be extended with the same scale of pay with that of Registrar of the University. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 and a counter affidavit dated 12.02.2018 as well as dated 08.05.2018 have been filed. In the latest affidavit filed by the Respondent-State, it has been, inter alia, submitted that in the 04th Pay Revision, the pay-scale of the Inspector of College has been found equivalent to that of Registrar and as per the provisions made in Departmental Sankalp No. 147, dated 19.02.2007, the pay-scale of the Inspector of College in Rs.16400-22400, is admissible. However, it has been submitted that if a proposal in the aforesaid pay scale for Inspector of College is made available by the University to the Department, then the approval may be given provided the appointment should have been by the recommended by the Commission. 6. Respective Counter affidavits have been filed by the Universities, wherein, it has been submitted that the Resolution have been made by the Universities for grant of same scale of pay to the Inspector of respective Colleges at par with the Registrar of the University. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that there is no gainsaying of the fact that the post of Inspector of Colleges have been treated at par with that of the Registrar of the Universities and the pay-scale of the Inspector of Colleges and the Registrar are the same. The pay-scale of the Inspector of Colleges have not been revised, the University has made necessary recommendations for grant of pay-scale with that of Registrar of the University. The pay-scale of the Inspector of Colleges have not been revised, the University has made necessary recommendations for grant of pay-scale with that of Registrar of the University. However, in the latest affidavit filed by the Respondent-State, the State has made categorical submission that the pay-scale of Rs.16,400/-Rs.22,400/-will be admissible to the Inspector of Colleges subject to approval and recommendation by the Commission. On perusal of the counter affidavit, it appears that the State Government in clear and unequivocal terms, has agreed on principles for grant of the pay-scale of Rs.16,400/-to Rs.22,400/-, therefore, in that view of the matter, the State Government is directed to pass appropriate order for grant of pay-scale to the petitioner at par with Registrar of the Universities within a reasonable period, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Petition disposed.