ORDER : 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.1.2014 at AnnexureM issued by the Director respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in C.D. and D.M. (Costume Design and Dress Making Department) during August 1988 and is working in the same cadre without being any promotion whatsoever. The petitioner had earlier approached this court in W.P.Nos.928789/2010 which came to be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider her representation in accordance with law. 3. Again the petitioner had approached this court in W.P.No.21394/2011 challenging the correctness of the endorsement issued by the respondent No.2 whereby the request of the petitioner for extension of AICTE pay scale was rejected. This court allowed the writ petition holding that the petitioner is entitled to AICTE pay scale if she fulfils the conditions stipulated in the Government order dated 22.11.2006. The petitioner was extended with the benefits of the Government order dated 22.11.2006 with effect from 1.4.1999. However, the said benefit granted to her was withdrawn on 25.10.2010 making the petitioner to continue in the earlier pay scale and subsequently, the 2nd respondent has issued an official memorandum seeking to recover the benefits from 1.4.1999 to 22.11.2006 granted to the petitioner quantifying the excess payment as Rs.4,45,429/in addition to amount of Rs.1,97,244/quantified towards the total interest to be recovered from the petitioner. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that the representation made by the petitioner in this regard was responded by the official respondents that an appropriate action will be taken, upon the clarification obtained by the Government which is being awaited. 5. Learned counsel Sri.L.Mahesh appearing for the petitioner placing reliance on the decision of this court rendered in W.P.No.39203/2010 submits that the petitioner herein being similarly situated is entitled to the same relief. 6. Learned AGA for the official respondents would submit that there is no legal impediment for the respondents to consider the applicability of the Government order dated 22.11.2006 to the petitioner in the light of the decision taken by this court in W.P.No.39203/2010 (D.D.13.12.2010) in the case of Smt. K.S.Navarathna Vs. State of Karnataka and others with regard to AICTE pay scale. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale as per AICTE scale. State of Karnataka and others with regard to AICTE pay scale. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale as per AICTE scale. However, the question would be, from which date the petitioner is entitled to such pay scale. It is discernable that in W.P.No.39203/2010 where the petitioner therein had joined the services on 5.4.1976 and retired on 31.3.1998, considering the Government order dated 22.11.2006, the extension of revised AICTE pay scale has been extended observing that the date of implementation is wrongly mentioned as 01.04.1998 instead of 01.04.1993. 8. In the light of the said order and the Government order dated 22.11.2006, the case of the petitioner requires to be reconsidered by the respondents. Hence, the impugned order dated 16.01.2014 at AnnexureM is quashed. Respondent No.2 shall reconsider the case of the petitioner inasmuch as the applicability of the benefits of the Government order dated 22.11.2006 pertaining to the grant of AICTE pay scale with effect from 1993 including all the consequential benefits thereof and such decision shall be taken in an expedite manner, in any event, not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, keeping in mind the observations made hereinabove. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.