JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner promotion and refix suitable pay scale from the year 1990 to till date and to pay all consequential and other attendant benefits including arrears of salary.) 1. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner promotion and refix suitable pay scale from the year 1990 to till date and to pay all consequential and other attendant benefits including arrears of salary. 2. The petitioner states that he was initially appointed as Water Tank Watchman on 05.04.1982 on compassionate ground on account of the death of his father, who was working in the Municipality. 3. The petitioner states that the vacancies aroused in the post of Driver and he submitted an application to promote him to the post of Driver. However, his case was not considered during the relevant point of time in the year 1996 and another person was appointed in the post of Driver. Thus, the petitioner made a representation, which was not considered. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was paid lesser pay than that of the other employees, who served in the other category. 4. This Court is of the considered opinion that the principles of equal pay for equal work is to be applied only if the comparison is to be made with reference to the same category. If the categories are different, then the principles of equal pay for equal work cannot be applied. 5. The counter filed by the 2nd respondent reveals that the petitioner acquired 8th Standard qualification only in December 1996. However, he had no valid license to drive Heavy Vehicles such as Water Tanker Lorry and Power Blazer. Hence, his request for heavy vehicle driver could not be considered by the respondent. The petitioner was suspended from service for inappropriate and misbehaviour with the elected Chairman of Dharmapuri Municipality from 19.10.1997. After receiving request with regret for his commissions and omission, his suspension was revoked and allowed to join duty on 17.04.1998 only with punishment of “Stoppage of increment of one year with cumulative effect.” The suspension period from 19.10.1997 to 17.04.1998, totaling 179 days was treated as Earned Leave. After receiving request with regret for his commissions and omission, his suspension was revoked and allowed to join duty on 17.04.1998 only with punishment of “Stoppage of increment of one year with cumulative effect.” The suspension period from 19.10.1997 to 17.04.1998, totaling 179 days was treated as Earned Leave. Therefore, the petitioner was considered for the post of Heavy Vehicle Driver in the year 2000 when there was vacant and appointed as Heavy Vehicle Driver with scale of pay eligible for the said post. Accordingly, the petitioner joined duty on 01.06.2000. The respondents have stated that the petitioner cannot equate himself with those appointed prior to him in the post of Drivers with prescribed qualification. Mr.P.Baskaran, who possessed the required qualification, was appointed as Driver from 01.03.1990. The said P.Baskaran has more than 10 years of service, when compared with the service of petitioner. The petitioner was promoted and posted as Driver only in the year 2000 and therefore, the petitioner cannot compare himself with the other person namely Mr.P.Baskaran for the purpose of claiming equal pay. 6. At the outset, the petitioner is unable to establish that he is eligible for promotion, during the relevant point of time in the year 1996, he did not possessed the requisite qualification and after acquiring the qualification, he was considered to the post of Driver and thus, there is no infirmity in respect of the actions taken by the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.