Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1888 (GUJ)

MULJIBHAI NARANBHAI BHATTI v. SECRETARY

2024-10-10

VAIBHAVI D.NANAVATI

body2024
JUDGMENT : VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J. 1. Heard Mr. F.B. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Pooja Ashar, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner herein came to be appointed as an Analytical Chemist, Class-II on 01.03.1962 and was promoted as Analytical Chemist, Class-I in the office of the Director (now Commissioner) of Geology and Mining and has retired on 31.05.1989. 2.2. It is the case of the petitioner herein that the petitioner was serving as Chemist in the office of the Director of Geology and Mining-respondent no. 3 herein and the said post of Director has been upgraded to the post of Commissioner. The name of office is Commissioner of Geology and Mining. The function of the department is geological mapping and exploration, administration and conservation of mineral wealth of the State and the aforesaid work is being done through it’s three wings, viz. (I) Geology, (II) Mining and (III) Laboratory. The duties of the Geologists in the petro logical and mineralogical laboratory consists of study of physical properties of rocks, mineral and ores. Similarly, the function of Chemist is in the same laboratory is consisting of chemical analyses of rocks, mineral and ores. Thus, the work of Geologist and Chemist is complementary to each other and not separate. Therefore, from the inception of the office, the pay scales of Geologists and Chemist were kept equal and both of them were working in the same pay scale of Rs. 370-1100 prior to Sarela Pay commission and the Sarela Pay Revision Commission had also recommended the equal pay scale of Rs. 500-1250 for both the posts of Geologist and Chemist. 2.3. It is the case of the petitioner that, thereafter, Gujarat State Second Pay Commission under the chairmanship of Justice D.A. Desai, created anomaly, who recommended the pay scale of Geologists of Rs. 1100-1600 and kept aside the Post of Chemist/petitioner without proper justification. Upon recommendation of Desai Pay Commission, a government resolution came to be issued on 24.10.1978 for revision of certain posts, in which the pay scale of Geologist was revised as 1100-1600, with retrospective effect of 01.01.1973, leaving aside the post of Chemist/petitioner, which is till that date is equal to the post of Geologist. Upon recommendation of Desai Pay Commission, a government resolution came to be issued on 24.10.1978 for revision of certain posts, in which the pay scale of Geologist was revised as 1100-1600, with retrospective effect of 01.01.1973, leaving aside the post of Chemist/petitioner, which is till that date is equal to the post of Geologist. It is further the case of the petitioner that, as such from 01.01.1973, the Geologists were came in the scale of 1100- 1600, while the Chemist who was drawing the equal pay, was continued in the old pay scale of 700-1500. Due to the aforesaid anomaly, the same resulted in monitory loss to the petitioner herein from 01.01.173 as compared to Geologists, copy of the government resolution dated 24.10.1978 is produced at Annexure-A. 2.4. In the meanwhile, the report of third pay commission under the chairmanship of Justice A.M. Ahmadi came to be issued in August, 1985, in which the pay scale of Geologists and Chemist were equated by recommending Rs. 1570-3110 for both the posts of Geologists and Chemist. The commission explained in detail, how the post of Geologist as well as the Chemist were equal, the said report is duly produced at Annexure-C. 2.5. Thereafter, the posts of Chemists were upgraded vide government resolution dated 21.06.1999 and the petitioner was allowed the equal pay scale of Rs. 2200-4200, which was further upgraded to Rs. 3000-4500 for both the categories. Hence, thereafter, both the posts of Geologists and 50% posts of Chemists were brought in the equal pay scale from 01.01.1986 and therefore, the petitioner was granted the equal pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500 alongwith the Geologists from 01.01.1986, but no consideration was made for the period from 01.01.1973 to 31.12.1985, which resulted in financial loss to the petitioner herein. The petitioner continuously made representation to his department as well as the finance department to remove the anomaly for the limited period from 01.01.1973 to 31.12.1985, but the said anomaly was not removed by the respondent authorities. It is the case of the petitioner that, prior thereto, the petitioner herein had preferred a petition being Special Civil Application No. 1908 of 1982. It is the case of the petitioner that, prior thereto, the petitioner herein had preferred a petition being Special Civil Application No. 1908 of 1982. Considering the submissions made by the respective parties, by order dated 24.06.1998, it was directed that if the petitioner were to file representation before the concerned respondent authorities or the government, the petitioner’s grievance be considered with the other materials, which may be considered at earlier occasion and the claim of the petitioner shall be decided. It was further directed that if such representation would be filed, the same be decided within a period of three months. 2.6. It is the case of the petitioner that, after the said order was passed, various representations have been made to the respondent-government, which are produced on record from Page-39 to 61, i.e. more than 7 to 8 representations were filed before the respondent authority for the period from 1998 to 2017. In absence of the said representations, having either been replied to or considered by the respondent authorities, the petitioner had no other option but to approach this Court by filing the present petition, whereby, the petitioner herein has prayed for the following reliefs, which reads thus: “(A) Your Lordships be pleased to admit and allow this petition. (B) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and thereby, be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply with the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in Special Civil Application No. 1908/1982 and thereby, consider the representations made by the petitioner with further direction to take into consideration the recommendation made by Sarela Pay Commission as well as Ahmadi Pay commission. (B-1) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and thereby be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give difference of pay scale commencing from 1.1.1973 to 31.12.1985 along with interest as per Ahmadi Pay Commission who has considered the post of Chemist is equivalent to the Post of Geologist. (C) Your Lordship will be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions to the respondent State Government to suitably amend the Government Resolution dated 21-6-1994 to give effect of the revision of pay to the post of Chemist from 1-1-73 and not from 1-1-86. (D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply with the order passed in Special Civil Application No. 1908/1982. (E) Such other and further relief that is just, fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted.” 3.1. Mr. F.B. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, at the outset submits that the petitioner came to be appointed in the department of Geology and Mining of the respondent- State, wherein, the work done by the three things, viz. (I) Geology, (II) Mining and (III) Laboratory are identical. It is submitted that, right from the very inception, the pay scales of Geologists and Chemists were remained identical and same till 31.12.1972 and to demonstrate the aforesaid submissions, he relied on the statement which is duly produced on record at Page-159. 3.2. It is submitted that the present petition is filed for a limited purpose to grant the equal pay scale to the petitioner herein to that of the Geologist, as was granted, prior to Sarela Pay Commission. It is submitted that, pursuant to the third pay commission under the chairmanship of Justice A.M. Ahmedi, the said anomaly had occurred in granting the same pay scale to the petitioner, whereby, the Desai Pay Commission was removed, and whereby, the Ahmadi Pay Commission was recommended for granting the same pay scale to the petitioner herein, i.e. of the pay scale of Chemist. It is further submitted that, upon recommendation of Ahmedi Pay Commission by order dated 21.06.1994, the petitioner herein was granted the said benefits, which is not in dispute, wherein, the petitioner herein by the said order dated 21.06.1994, which is duly produced at Page-31 and 32, by government resolution dated 21.09.1994, revised the pay scale of the Chemist/petitioner from 700-1500 to 3000-4500 by upgrading 50% posts of Chemists to Chemist Grade-1, by giving effect from 01.01.1986, however, the period from 01.01.1973 to 31.12.1985 remained unrevised and in view thereof, the petitioner has approached this Court for the limited purpose to remove the said anomaly, which occurred while passing the impugned order/resolution dated 21.06.1994, by modifying/granting the relief from 01.01.1973 to 31.12.1985 and that the anomaly that had occurred for the said period be removed and petition may kindly be allowed. 4.1. Per contra, Ms. Pooja Ashar, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State placed reliance on the affidavit-in-reply which is duly produced at Page- 64, whereby, it is stated that the petitioner herein is not entitled to such reliefs, as prayed for. It is submitted that the respondents have merely followed the recommendations of the Pay Commissions. It is submitted that, as such the petitioner herein cannot have any grievance, with respect to the impugned order dated 21.06.1994. It is submitted that the anomaly has been removed and the petitioner herein has been granted the said benefits. It is submitted that 50% posts of Chemists were upgraded and the petitioner was allowed the equal pay scale of 2200-4200, which was further upgraded to 3000-4500 and the posts of Chemists and Geologists were brought in equal pay scale from 01.01.1986. 4.2. It is submitted that the post and nature of the work carried-out by the Chemists and Geologists are different and in view thereof, it cannot be said that, there is any error on the part of the respondent-State, however, considering the recommendation of Ahmedi Pay Commission, the said anomaly that had occurred in the pay scale extended to the Chemist is duly removed. 4.3. It is also submitted by Ms. Ashar, learned AGP that the present petition is filed seeking difference in higher pay scale for the period between 1973 to 1986, after such a long delay. 4.3. It is also submitted by Ms. Ashar, learned AGP that the present petition is filed seeking difference in higher pay scale for the period between 1973 to 1986, after such a long delay. It is submitted that the petitioner herein are also receiving the pensionary benefits, as the petitioner was superannuated as back as in the year 1989. It is submitted that, on the aforesaid ground of delay and latches, the present petition is required to be dismissed. 4.4. It is also submitted that, if the petitioner was aggrieved by the order granting the benefits vide order dated 21.06.1994, which is duly produced at Page-31, it was open for the petitioner to challenge the same at the relevant point of time, however, the present petition is filed as back as in the year 2017 seeking the modification in the order dated 21.06.1994, wherein, in Clause-9, petitioner herein has been extended the benefits of the pay scale of Chemist, Grade-I, w.e.f. 01.01.1986 in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500. 4.5. Ms. Ashar, learned AGP further submitted that, no representation has been filed by the petitioner, pursuant to the order dated 24.06.1998 passed in Special Civil Application No. 1908 of 1982. The petitioner herein having not complied with the order and having not filed the representation, the question of complying with the order dated 24.06.1998 passed in SCA No. 1908 of 1982 does not arise. 4.6. Placing reliance on the aforesaid submissions, it is submitted that, no reliefs as prayed for be granted and the present petition be dismissed. 5.1. Mr. F.B. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, has taken this Court to the representations filed by the petitioner herein as also the Union. Reliance is placed on the representation filed in the year 1998, which is duly produced at Page-39, the said representation was filed by the Union. The said representation was filed alongwith the order dated 24.06.1998 passed in SCA No. 1908 of 1982. Reliance is also placed on the representations filed by the petitioner herein dated 25.05.1999, which is duly produced at Page-46, 09.11.2009 at Page-50, 26.05.2010 at Page-52 and others, wherein, the petitioner herein has time and again approached the respondent State/competent authority from time to time till 01.05.2017, reiterating the petitioner’s contentions to remove the anomaly for not granting the pay scale as that of the Geologist from 01.01.1971 to 01.01.1986. It is submitted that, in view thereof, the said representations having not been considered, the petitioner has filed the present petition for the aforesaid limited purpose only. 5.2. In the course of hearing, Mr. F.B. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner also placed on record before the Court, the copy of the Registered Post A.D. slip of the said representations that were filed by the petitioner herein. 6.1. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is not in dispute that right from the inception of the department of Geology and Mining, wherein, the said department has three wings, viz. (I) Geology, (II) Mining and (III) Laboratory. The petitioner herein came to be appointed as an Analytical Chemist, Class-II on 01.03.1962 and promoted as Analytical Chemist, Class-I in the office of the Director (now Commissioner) of Geology and Mining and has retired on 31.05.1989. 6.2. It appears that, considering the pay scales of the concerned department, the Desai Pay Commission, on 01.01.1973 recommended the benefits to the Geologist in the pay scale of 1100-1600 and the Chemist in the pay scale of 700-1500. The said anomaly came to be removed by the third pay commission, i.e. Ahmadi Pay Commission. Upon perusal of the report of Ahmadi Pay Commission, it emerges that, the following were considered, wherein, it was stated thus: “The Director pointed out that the statement in Para-14 of the Second (Gujarat) Pay Commission Report is not correct. A look at the educational qualifications mentioned in the beginning in this section will show that the qualifications are quite comparable and there is no adequate reason to give a higher scale to the Geologists.” 6.2.1. Considering the aforesaid, the relevant part of the report germane for adjudication of the dispute in the present petition reads thus: “10. The representatives of the Gujarat State Mining Service Gazetted Officers' Association has also stated in their evidence before the Commission that the Geologists and Assistant Directors are inter-changeable and that both are working in different districts and in Junagadh and Jamnagar, Head of the office is Assistant Director and at all other places it is Geologists. They have further mentioned that since the duties and responsibilities preformed by both are the same, there is no reason why equal pay cannot be granted. They have further mentioned that since the duties and responsibilities preformed by both are the same, there is no reason why equal pay cannot be granted. Keeping in view, the educational qualifications and the hierarchy in the Department, we are of the firm view that the Geologists, Assistant Directors and Chemists should be on the same pay scale. The Director of Geology and Mining and also the Secretary, Industries, Mines and Power Department have categorically stated that there should be parity between Geologists, Assistant Directors and Chemists. The Gujarat State Mining Service Gazetted Officers’ Association in their written representation have stated that giving of different scales to Geologists on the one hand and Assistant Director and Chemist on the other and also to Assistant Geologist on the one hand and Analytical Assistant and Assistant Mining Engineer on the other has inducted an anomaly in the matter of pay scales. They have demanded uniform pay scales for the following categories of posts: Category I Senior Geologist, Deputy Director, and Senior Chemist. Category II Geologist, Assistant Director and Chemist. Category III Assistant Geologist, Analytical Chemist and Assistant Mining Engineer. But their demand at the same time is for the removal of anomaly by giving higher pay scales to each category: Rs. 1600-2000 for Category I Officers Rs. 1100-1600 for Category II Officers Rs. 700-1300 for Category III Officers. Thus, the recommendations made by the Second (Gujarat) Pay Commission for higher scale to Geologists and Assistant Geologists and the ultimate sanction of the higher scales for these posts have egged the Association on to demand higher scale for other officers also who had earlier parity in the pay scale with Geologists and Assistant Geologist. 11. As has already been mentioned above the Second (Gujarat) Pay Commission had recommended the scale of Rs. 1100-1600 for the officers mentioned in Category-I above but the scale was hiked up to Rs. 1600-2000 on the consideration that the scale of Geologist was ultimately sanctioned at Rs. 1100-1600. Keeping in view the qualifications and experience required and also keeping in view the internal hierarchy in the cadres we do not think that the post of Geologist should carry a higher scale than that of the Assistant Director and Chemist. We, therefore, recommend the scale of Rs. 1570-3110 for the posts of Geologist, Assistant Director and Chemist. 1100-1600. Keeping in view the qualifications and experience required and also keeping in view the internal hierarchy in the cadres we do not think that the post of Geologist should carry a higher scale than that of the Assistant Director and Chemist. We, therefore, recommend the scale of Rs. 1570-3110 for the posts of Geologist, Assistant Director and Chemist. For the post of senior Geologist, Deputy Director and Senior Chemist, we recommend the scale of Rs. 2250-3270. (v) Assistant Geologist Analytical Chemist Assistant Drilling Engineer Rs. 700-1300 Rs. 650-1200 6.3. It appears that, while accepting the report of the Third Pay Commission, the respondent-State by government resolution/order dated 21.06.1994 granted the same pay scale to the Chemist as that of the Geologist, as reflected in the order at Clause-3 and Clause-9, duly produced at Annexure-D, Page-31. Clause-3 and Clause-9 reads thus: “(3) The present posts of Chemist having pay scale of Rs. 2000- 4200 have been upgraded and two posts of Chemist Grade -1 have been sanctioned in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500 from 01.01.86. (9) Mr. M. N. Bhatti is appointed on the post of Chemist Grade-1 in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500 from 01.01.86 to 31.05.89.” 6.4. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that, it is not in dispute that the respondent- State, has on its own, pointed out the anomaly in the Third Pay Commission. It is apposite to refer to the statement/table which is produced on record at Page-159, which reads thus: STATEMENT OF VARIOUS PAY COMMISSIONS: Geologist Chemist Beginning of Department (Prior to Sarela Pay Commission) 370-1100 370-1100 Sarela Pay Commission (From 1-1-1969) 500-1250 500-1250 ROP 1975 700-1500 700-1500 Desai Pay Commission (From 1-1-73) 1100-1600 700-1500 Anomaly Removal Committee (Dispersed by Government) Ahmedi Pay Commission (From 1-1-1986) 1570-3110 1570-3110 Shah Committee (Expert) (From April 1987) 2200-4200 2200-4200 Modification dated 21-6-94 (50% posts of Chemists were upgraded as Grade-1) 3000-4500 3000-4500 7. In light of the aforesaid, it is apposite to refer to the position of law, in the case of Legal Metrology Inspectors Association v/s. Legal Metrology Department & Ors. 2023 (1) GLR 791 , wherein, in identical facts, it was also the case of anomaly in the pay scale. The respondent-State was directed to consider the pay scale and to remove the anomaly and consider the case of the petitioner at par with the others. 2023 (1) GLR 791 , wherein, in identical facts, it was also the case of anomaly in the pay scale. The respondent-State was directed to consider the pay scale and to remove the anomaly and consider the case of the petitioner at par with the others. The relevant paras-11 to 16 of the said decision reads thus: “11. From the record, it appears that in the year 1992, the post of Additional Assistant Engineer in each discipline received hike in the pay-scale wherein pay-scale of 425-700 was revised to 1400-2300 with effect from 01-04-1992. The Government Resolution dated 9th October, 1992 pertaining to the amendment to Schedule-C of the Gujarat Civil Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1987 clearly indicates increase in the pay-scale of Additional Assistant Engineer, whereas the pay-scale of Junior Metrology Inspector continued to be so. This anomaly continued even in the year 1998, when the State came out with the Gujarat Civil Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1998, wherein Junior Inspectors of Weights and Measures, which was given pay-scale of 1400-2300, was revised to 4500-7000, whereas the Additional Assistant Engineer, who were treated to be in the pay-scale of 1640-2900, got the revision of pay to 5500-9000. 12. The Court has taken into consideration the fact that the petitioner had agitated this issue immediately by filing Special Civil Application No. 9504 of 1996. However, considering the fact that Anomaly Committee was appointed to take into consideration such cases and as the petition was pending and the Anomaly Committee was not considering the case of the petitioner, such petition came to be disposed of by order dated 01-02-1999, wherein the petition was withdrawn so as to enable the Anomaly Committee to examine the case of the petitioner. The outcome of the Anomaly Committee was never communicated to the petitioner-Association. However, along with the affidavit in reply, report of the Anomaly Committee was placed on record. Perusal of the Anomaly Committee proceedings would indicate that the petitioner had claimed parity of pay-scale with the post of Mamlatdar, Police Sub Inspector, Sales Tax Inspector as well as Additional Assistant Engineer. However, along with the affidavit in reply, report of the Anomaly Committee was placed on record. Perusal of the Anomaly Committee proceedings would indicate that the petitioner had claimed parity of pay-scale with the post of Mamlatdar, Police Sub Inspector, Sales Tax Inspector as well as Additional Assistant Engineer. However, in the report of the Anomaly Committee, apparently, comparison with the post of Additional Assistant Engineer was left out and parity with regard to other three posts was only made and by considering the fact the educational qualification as well as nature of work for the post of Mamlatdar, Police Sub Inspector and Sales Tax Inspector being different from the work of Junior Metrology Inspector, disparity was not removed. 13. The Anomaly Committee Report was also examined by the Cabinet Committee, which also upheld the report of the Anomaly Committee. However, it would be appropriate to observe that the Finance Department had passed the Resolution dated 23rd November, 2011 (which is annexed as Annexure-RII), wherein it was resolved not to accept the report of the Anomaly Committee with regard to disparity of pay-scale. It would be appropriate to mention that once the Government has also not accepted the recommendation of the Anomaly Committee, indirectly disparity of pay-scale has been acknowledged by the State Government. 14. Argument offered by learned AGP under instruction that the post of Junior Metrology Inspector is Class-III post, whereas the claim of payscale comparable to the Additional Assistant Engineer by the petitioner, is unwarranted as the Additional Assistant Engineer is Class-II post and therefore, such argument particularly cannot be accepted in view of the fact that Recruitment Rules of the Additional Assistant Engineer, which are placed at Annexure-P and Annexure-Q, would indicate that the post of Additional Assistant Engineer in subordinate Engineering Service is Class-III as per the Recruitment Rules. 15. In view of the aforesaid, the Court is of the view that the anomaly has crept in with regard to the pay-scale, which was at the initial stage similar to and at par with Additional Assistant Engineer with effect from the revision of pay-scale 1987, when pay-scale of Additional Assistant Engineer was revised in the year 1992, wherein revised pay-scale of 1400-2300 was given with effect from 01-04-1992. This anomaly, in the opinion of the Court, has been acknowledged by the State Government and therefore, the same is required to be rectified. This anomaly, in the opinion of the Court, has been acknowledged by the State Government and therefore, the same is required to be rectified. Considering the passage of time in between after filing of the first petition in the year 1996, the Court deems it fit to direct the Finance Department, State of Gujarat to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the observations made herein above, treating the post of Junior Metrology Inspector at par with the Additional Assistant Engineer, Class-III. Such exercise to be undertaken by the Finance Department within period of three months from the date of receipt of writ of the judgment of this Court. It will be open for the Finance Department to examine the nature of work of the Additional Assistant Engineer and Junior Metrology Inspector. 16. The petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.” 7.1. Mr. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the aforesaid anomaly has already been removed. 8. In the case of Bhagwan Sahai Carpenter and others vs. Union of India and another, AIR 1989 SC 1215 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has in Para-11 held as under: “11. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case we are unable to accept the contentions advanced on behalf of the Union of India on the ground that the employees of the different trades in the skilled grade cannot be treated differently i.e. by allowing higher scale of pay to employees of some of the trades from an earlier date and giving the same benefit to members of other trades in the skilled grade from a later date. This will per se be discriminatory and it will be contrary to the equity clause envisaged in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution as well as the fundamental right of equal pay for equal work. The petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of the skilled grade of Rs. 260-400 from October 16, 1981 instead of October 15, 1984 as has been given to the employees of other trades in the skilled grade.” 9. Considering the submissions made by Ms. The petitioners are entitled to get the benefit of the skilled grade of Rs. 260-400 from October 16, 1981 instead of October 15, 1984 as has been given to the employees of other trades in the skilled grade.” 9. Considering the submissions made by Ms. Ashar, learned AGP that the petition is barred by delay and latches, upon perusal of the record, it emerges that upon the order passed in SCA No. 1908 of 1982 dated 24.06.1998, wherein, in para-3 and 4 the Court has observed as under: “3. A writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 1046 of 1980 filed by the Senior Geologists in this Court which was decided on 29/30-7-1980, whereby the Government Resolution dated 24-10-1978 was set aside regarding the part of the revised pay scale of the Geologists to Rs. 1100-1600 and as such all the Assistant Directors, Geologists and Chemists were placed at par far as pay scale is concerned. 3rd Pay Commission Report was submitted in the year 1985 which elaborately considered all the various aspects regarding the Assistant Directors, Geologists and Chemists and recommended the grade of Rs. 1750-3110 to the Assistant Geologist and Chemist and later on Shah Pay Commission Report was submitted in the year 1987 which also accepted pay-scale given to these persons at par. By the Government Resolution dated 9-9-1980 the Geologist have been given pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500. The petitioner are claiming the same pay scale on the basis of Shah Pay Commission Report. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also placed the relevant portion of the Shah Pay Commission Report on the record of this case. Learned Counsel for the State Government submitted that this is a matter which cannot be decided by this Court. The petitioner should have made representation before the appropriate authority placing their grievances. No finding can be recorded at this stage that the Government has committed any mistake in awarding higher grade to the Geologists and Chemist. In the facts and circumstances, it is difficult to record any finding that the Government has committed any error in absence of other materials which might have been considered by the Government at the relevant time. 4. In the facts and circumstances, it is difficult to record any finding that the Government has committed any error in absence of other materials which might have been considered by the Government at the relevant time. 4. It would be proper that the petitioner may file their representation before the authority concerned/Government and Government/authority concerned will consider the grievances of the petitioner with any other materials which might have been considered at the earlier occasion and decide the claim of the petitioner on merits. In case, such representation is filed by the petitioner along with the certified copy of this order the Government/ appropriate authority will decide the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation along with the certified copy of this order.” 10. The said order as referred above has been passed, wherein, in SCA No. 1046 of 1980 which was filed by Senior Geologists was decided on 29/30.07.1980, whereby, the government resolution dated 24.10.1979 was set aside regarding the part of the revised pay scale of Geologists of Rs. 1100-1600 and as such all the Assistant Directors/Geologists and Chemists were placed at par with the pay scale of the concerned 3rd Pay Commission Report, which was submitted in the year 1985, which elaborately considered all the aspects. The said petitioners also claimed the same pay scale on the basis of the 3rd Pay Commission Report and in light thereof, the respondent authority was directed to consider the representation, that may be filed by the petitioners therein. Upon perusal of the record, it emerges that the 1st representation was filed by the Union alongwith the copy of the said order dated 24.06.1998 and the petitioner herein has also filed representations from time to time, wherein, this Court has also perused the Registered Post A.D. slip, which are placed on record, to test the contentions of the petitioner that such representations were preferred to the respondent State. In spite of such representations having been filed by the petitioner from time to time, such representations are not considered by the respondent- State, in spite of the order passed by this Court. In spite of such representations having been filed by the petitioner from time to time, such representations are not considered by the respondent- State, in spite of the order passed by this Court. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner herein is at par with those of the Geologist and in view thereof also, it was incumbent on the part of the respondent-State to consider the representation of the petitioner herein, in light of the recommendation of the 3rd Pay commission. As back as in the year 2017, the present petition is filed and the delay cannot be attributed to the petitioner herein. It is because the representations that were filed by the petitioner herein were not considered by the respondent-State, the petitioner herein is compelled to file the present petition. 11. In light of the aforesaid, upon perusal of the record, in the opinion of this Court, the anomaly crept-in with respect to the pay scale of the petitioner for the period from 1973 to 1985, as it emerges from the aforesaid table, duly produced in Para- 6.4, which is not in dispute, wherein, the Chemists are granted the pay scale, less than that of the Geologists, i.e. 700-1500 is required to be rectified by the respondent- State, in view of the respondent- State’s own recommendation that the anomaly which crept-in, in the Desai Pay Commission, wherein, the pay scale of the Geologists were recommend as that of Rs. 1100-1500 and Chemists was Rs. 700-1100, which was accordingly rectified/removed by the 3rd Pay Commissioner, i.e. the Ahemadi Pay Commission. Once, it emerges that the petitioner herein has also extended the benefits upon recommendation of Ahmadi Pay Commission by an order dated 21.06.1994, the prayers as prayed for in the present petition are required to be allowed and the same are allowed, directing the respondent authorities to give the difference of pay scale commencing from 01.01.1973 to 31.12.1985 alongwith the interest at the rate of 6% for the aforesaid interregnum period. 12. In view of the reasoning as referred above, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the receipt of the order, in line with the aforesaid directions and reasoning. 13. 12. In view of the reasoning as referred above, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the receipt of the order, in line with the aforesaid directions and reasoning. 13. For the foregoing reasons, in the opinion of this Court, this is a fit case to exercise the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article-226 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, the present Petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.