ORDER : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for respondents 1 and 2. Notices issued to respondents 3 and 4 though served they remained absent and the service was held sufficient against them. Respondents 5 to 7 are represented by Sri Prakash S. Udikeri. Respondent No. 8 is also represented by a counsel. I have also perused the records. 2. There is no dispute whatsoever that the petitioners have been working as Professor and Assistant Librarian respectively under Sri Dharmashthala Manjunatheshwara College of Engineering and Technology, Dharwad, represented by respondents 5 to 8. It is also not in dispute that, the All India Council for Technical Education (for short ‘AICTE’) on 22.01.2010 introduced new pay scales to the employees working in the Engineering Colleges with effect from 01.01.2006 as per Annexure-B. The respondents 4 to 6 have adopted the scales as fixed by the AICTE vide Annexure-D dated 09.05.2011 in No. SDMC/EST/526/2011-12. However, the respondents 5 to 8 though adopted the scales but given effect to those scales from 01.04.2011 and not from 01.01.2006. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have given various representations which are marked at Annexures E to P to various authorities, i.e., including all the respondents. In-spite of their various representations from 28.10.2013 upto 25.05.2014 the respondents have not taken any steps to consider their grievances. 3. For having received the representations of the petitioners, the respondents 3 and 4, i.e., AICTE, have issued an endorsement as per Annexure-Q dated 19.06.2014 considering the representation of the petitioners dated 25.05.2014. They had stated that, the matter is related to payment of fitment benefit, the same is the subject matter between the employer and the employee and AICTE has no role in the same. Hence, directed the petitioners to approach the grievance cell of the Institute in which they are working. 4. The records disclose that as per Annexures E to P the petitioners have also approached the grievance cell, i.e., the respondents 5 to 8 but they have also not taken any steps to consider the representation of the petitioners. Under the above said circumstances, when once the representations are given raising the same grievances by the employees it becomes duty of the employer to consider the same in accordance with law which has not been done by the respondents 5 to 8. Under the above said circumstances, when once the representations are given raising the same grievances by the employees it becomes duty of the employer to consider the same in accordance with law which has not been done by the respondents 5 to 8. In view of the above, it is just and necessary to allow the petitions to give direction to the respondents 1 and 5 to 8. Hence, the following order is passed. ORDER Writ Petitions are partly allowed. Respondents 1 and 5 to 8 are hereby directed to consider various representations filed by the petitioners as per Annexures E to P in order to consider, whether they are entitled for the AICTE pay scale from 01.01.2006 and the above said respondents have to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As the representations are made since 2013, the petitioners are also directed to give one more representation to the respondents 1 and 5 to 8 along with the copies of their earlier representations, with a certified copy of this order so as to enable the respondents 1 and 5 to 8 to pass appropriate orders within the stipulated time. The petitioners have to submit their representations within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and within three months thereafter their representations have to be considered by the respondents 1 and 5 to 8.