JUDGMENT : Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J. 1. Heard Mr. Samir B. Gohil, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Suman Motla, the learned AGP appearing for the respondent – State. 2. Since the issue involved in both the captioned petitions is self-same, are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, Special Civil Application No.12582 of 2014 is treated as the lead matter. 3. By way of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners herein have prayed for the following reliefs :- “(A) Quashing and setting aside the letters dt. 27.8.2014 and directing the respondents to grant 2nd higher pay scale to the petitioner w.e.f 1.6.2002 and further directing the respondents to revise his pension and retirement benefits accordingly and pay arrears with 10% interest. (B) During the pendency and final disposal of this petition, the respondents may be directed to grant 2nd higher pay scale w.e.f 1.6.2002. (C) To grant such and further relief as may be deemed fit and proper.” 4. The Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition read thus :- 4.1 The petitioner was appointed as Distributor on 13.4.1973 by the respondent No.3 and promoted to the post of Compositor on 18.2.1977 and retired on 31.1.2012. 4.2 The petitioner was granted 1st higher pay scale w.e.f 1.6.1987 as per the Government Resolution dated 16.8.94 and became entitled for the 2nd higher pay scale on 1.6.1997 upon completion of 09 years of service from 1.6.1987, but was granted the same w.e.f 1.6.2007 in October, 2008 after 20 years of service from the date of grant of 1st higher pay scale. 4.3 The petitioner made various representations to the respondents authorities, however in absence of any response from the respondent authorities, the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No.6867 of 2014 wherein directions came to be issued by order dated 6.5.2014 to decide representation of the petitioner dated 8.5.2009. The said order dated 6.5.2014 is duly produced at Annexure-A. 4.4 Thereafter by letter dated 27.8.20 14, the petitioner’s claim came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner was granted 2nd higher pay scale as per Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 and the petitioner’s junior was granted higher pay-scale as per Government Resolution dated 2.7.2007. The said order dated 6.5.2014 is duly produced at Annexure-A. 4.4 Thereafter by letter dated 27.8.20 14, the petitioner’s claim came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner was granted 2nd higher pay scale as per Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 and the petitioner’s junior was granted higher pay-scale as per Government Resolution dated 2.7.2007. In view thereof, the petitioner has challenged the decision dated 27.8.2014 by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India and filed the present petition. 5. Mr. Samir B. Gohil, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner at the outset has limited his grievance to the second higher pay-scale and submitted that the petitioner herein be considered for grant of second higher pay-scale as per Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. 5.1 It is submitted that the petitioner herein completed 18 years of service on 1.6.2002 and was entitled to second higher pay-scale as per the Government Resolution dated 2.7.2007, however the respondent authorities have erred in granting the second higher pay-scale w.e.f. 1.6.2007 in October, 2008. 5.2 It is submitted that even considering the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 the petitioner is entitled for grant of second higher pay-scale having completed 09 years in the year 1996. 5.3 It is submitted that the case of the petitioner be considered as per the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 for grant of second higher pay-scale upon completion of 09 years of service from the grant of first higher pay-scale i.e. 1.6.1987. 6. Ms. Suman Motla, the learned AGP relied on the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent authority and submitted that the petitioner herein has prayed for grant of second higher pay-scale as provided under the Government Resolution dated 2.7.2007. It is also submitted that the employees junior to the petitioner was granted the second higher pay-scale under the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. 6.1 Ms. It is also submitted that the employees junior to the petitioner was granted the second higher pay-scale under the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. 6.1 Ms. Motla, the learned AGP submitted that the Finance Department letter bearing No.PGR102007/615/M(Part-I) dated 17.12.2007 clarifies to regularize the cases from dated 1.1.2006 to 1.7.2007 under the Govt Resolution dated 16.8.1994 and on or after dated 02.07.2007 under the Government Resolution dated 02.07.2007 and it is also resolved under the Government Resolution dated 18.02.2011 that the employees who entitled for the second higher pay-scale between dated 1.1.2006 to 1.7.2007 are given the same under Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994 after considering eligibility criteria and those employees entitled for the second higher pay-scale on or after 02.07.2007 considered under the Government Resolution dated 02.07.2007. It is submitted that the Government passed a Resolution dated 17.09.2014 whereby if there is any dispute with regard to the pay fixation, in which, in such case if there is any difficulty, the same be referred to the Anomaly Committee. The same is pending before the Anomaly Committee for consideration. 6.2 It is submitted that the petitioner herein is granted the benefit of second higher pay-scale. It is submitted that no anomaly can be said to have been committed by the respondent authority. The respondent authority having considered the case of the petitioner under Clause (3) of the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 wherein the said Resolution provides that on completion of 09 years plus 01 year stagnation or reaching maximum stage of pay-scale plus 01 year stagnation, whichever is later, the petitioner was eligible and entitled to second higher pay-scale as per the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. The said Government Resolution specifically provides that, whichever is later or reaching maximum stage of the said pay-scale. 6.3 In the facts of the present case, the petitioner reached maximum stage on 1.6.2006 and was granted higher pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 upon completion of 01 year stagnation on 1.6.2007 and the petitioner retired on 31.1.2012. 6.4 In light of the aforesaid, no interference is called for in the impugned order which is passed by the respondent authority. 7. 6.3 In the facts of the present case, the petitioner reached maximum stage on 1.6.2006 and was granted higher pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 upon completion of 01 year stagnation on 1.6.2007 and the petitioner retired on 31.1.2012. 6.4 In light of the aforesaid, no interference is called for in the impugned order which is passed by the respondent authority. 7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it emerges that the petitioner herein is seeking the benefit of second higher pay-scale and the petitioner also submits that the petitioner is limiting the prayer for grant of second higher pay-scale under the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 and in light of the Government Resolution dated 18.2.2011 the employees entitled to second higher pay-scale between 01.01.2006 to 01.07.2007 are governed by the Govt Resolution dated 16.08.1994 after considering their eligibility criteria and the employees entitled to the second higher pay-scale on or after 2.7.2007 are governed by the Government Resolution dated 2.7.2007 after considering the eligibility criteria. 8. It is also undisputed that the petitioner herein came to be appointed as Distributor on 13.4.1973 under the respondent No.3 herein and was promoted to the post of Compositor on 18.2.1977, prior to the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994, retired on 31.1.2012. The petitioner was granted first higher pay-scale w.e.f 1.6.1987 as per the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. The petitioner completed 18 years of service in the year 1996 and in view thereof the petitioner’s case be considered for grant of second higher pay-scale upon completion of 18 years from the initial date of appointment. 9. It is undisputed that the petitioner is governed by Clause (3) of the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994. The petitioner has given up the challenge with respect to stepping up of the pay-scale and in view thereof the respondent authority to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and independently for grant of second higher pay-scale upon completion of 18 years of service from the date of initial appointment in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994 taking into consideration the eligibility of the petitioner and accordingly adjust the payment made to the petitioner earlier. The respondent authority to decide the case of the petitioner within a period eight weeks from the receipt of this order. 10. With the aforesaid directions, the present petitions stand disposed of.