ORDER : (Goutam Bhaduri, J.) : 1. Challenge in the present petition is to Schedule-I of the rules namely; Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-III (Non-Gazetted, Non-Clerical) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 (Annexure - P/2) in respect of the post of Supervisor and Excavation Assistant and Schedule-IV of the rules namely; Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-I and Class-II (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 (Annexure – P/1) wherein for promotional avenue to the post of Archaeologist, the post of Supervisor, who is placed at Level-9 and Excavation Assistant, who is placed at Level-8 have been put at par. 2. (i) Case of the petitioner is that he joined the Department as an Excavation Assistant on 5-9-2008 and till date he is working in the same post. At the time of appointment of the petitioner, the services of the petitioner were governed by the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Archaeology, Archive and Museum, Directorate Grade-III (Non Gazetted Non Clerical) Service Rules, 1998 (for brevity ‘the Rules, 1998’). The said Rules, 1998 were adopted by the State of Chhattisgarh as per the notification dated 25-9-2002. (ii) According to the petitioner, Rules 6 & 13 of the Rules, 1998, which provide for recruitment & promotion wherein the reference is made to Schedule IV Entry 3 of the Rules, 1998. Pursuant to the said Rules, the post of Excavation Assistant was to be filled up by way of promotion from the post of Supervisor with five years experience, thereby the post of Supervisor was subordinate to the post of Excavation Assistant. Likewise, the new set up was issued by the State of Chhattisgarh in the notification dated 25-9-2002 whereby the pay band of Excavation Assistant was at Rs.4500-7000 and the pay band of Supervisor was at Rs.4000-6000. (iii) In the meanwhile, the State of Chhattisgarh received the recommendation from the Brahma Swarup Committee, which was specially constituted to redress the various grievances which include the post of Supervisor wherein the Committee after going through the nature of work recommended the pay scale of Supervisor from Rs.4500-7000 to Rs.5500-9000 whereas the post of Excavation Assistant was not touched upon. In fact, the petitioner was initially appointed as Excavation Assistant as per the Rules, 1998 and, as such, he could not been placed below the Supervisor, as the Rules, 1998 speaks about promotional post of Excavation Assistant from the post of Supervisor thereby unequal cannot be treated equally or above, which would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in Schedule-IV of the Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-I and Class-II (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 (Annexure – P/1) the posts of Supervisor and Excavation Assistant have been placed at par for promotion to the post of Archaeologist and in Schedule-I of the Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-III (Non-Gazetted, Non-Clerical) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 (Annexure – P/2) the post of Supervisor has been placed at a higher pedestal at S.No.2 than that of the Excavation Assistant, who is placed at S.No.13, therefore, there is a violation and deviation from the original rules of appointment and, as such, the same is ultra vires to the fundamental right of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State, ex adverso, would submit that the Rules so framed in 2020 was based on the in puts which includes the Brahma Swarup Committee report wherein the nature of work was evaluated and consequently, the Supervisor was placed at a higher pedestal than that of Excavation Assistant looking to their nature of work the said Rules were framed on the basis of report of expert committee and no independent prejudice prevailed to eliminate the petitioner and since the short comings in the earlier rules, new rules were required to be framed. Accordingly, it is framed. He would further submit that neither the submission do not hold to show that the rules have been framed are not within the legislative competence of the State or is violative of any provisions of the Constitution of India. In support of his contention, learned cousnel would place reliance upon the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of Union of India v Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 173 and Union of India and Others v DGOF Employees Association and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1471. 5. In support of his contention, learned cousnel would place reliance upon the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of Union of India v Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 173 and Union of India and Others v DGOF Employees Association and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1471. 5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents. 6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner joined the service in the year 2008 and at that time the Rules, 1998 were in operation, which placed the post of Supervisor below the post of Excavation Assistant and it was a promotional post. 7. In the meanwhile, before framing of Rules since the revised pay scale was issued from time to time, a Committee was formed named as Brahma Swarup Committee, which gave its report to the State of Chhattisgarh. Perusal of the said report would show that for the post of Supervisor the pay band was revised from Rs.4500-7000 to Rs.5500-9000 whereas the pay band of the Excavation Assistant was not touched upon. Subsequently, the Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-III (Non-Gazetted, Non-Clerical) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 came into force. 8. Perusal of the said Rules, it is manifest that in Schedule-I the Supervisor was placed at S.No.2 in the pay band of Rs.9300-34800 (Level-9) whereas the Excavation Assistant has been placed at S.No.13 in the pay band of Rs.5200-20200 (Level-7) and for promotion to the post of Archaeologist, both the posts of Supervisor and Excavation Assistant were placed at par. The said Rule would show that the pay band was revised as per the recommendation of the Brahma Swarup Committee. 9. It would be apt to quote Schedule-I of the Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-III (Non-Gazetted, Non-Clerical) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 for ready reference : SCHEDULE - I (See Rule 4 and 5) S. No. Name of the Posts included in the service Number of Posts Classification Scale of pay Remarks (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1. Assistant Programmer 01 Class – III (Non-Gazetted Non-Clerical Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 2. Supervisor 01 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 3. Assistant Programmer 01 Class – III (Non-Gazetted Non-Clerical Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 2. Supervisor 01 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 3. Chemist 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 4. Senior Guide 03 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 5. Assistant Archive Officer 01 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 ---- 6. Instructor 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-09 ---- 7. Assistant Librarian 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 ---- 8. Deputy Engineer 04 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 ---- 9. Draftsman 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 ---- 10. Artist 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 As per recommendation of the Bramhaswarup Committee 11. Assistant Horticulture Development Officer 01 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 By Deputation 12. Research Assistant 02 ----do---- Pay Band 9300- 34800 Level-08 ---- 13. Excavation Assistant 03 ----do---- Pay Band 5200- 20200 Level-07 ---- 14. Translator 02 ----do---- Pay Band 5200- 20200 Level-07 ---- 15. Technical Assistant (Writing) 02 ----do---- Pay Band 5200- 20200 Level-07 ---- 16. Guide 04 ----do---- Pay Band 5200- 20200 Level-07 ---- 10. Schedule-IV of the Chhattisgarh, Directorate of Archaeology, Archives, Museums, Official Language and Culture Class-I and Class-II (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2020 reads as under : SCHEDULE-IV (See rule 13) S. No. Name of service or Post from which Promotion to be made Period of experience for promotion Name of service or Post to which promotion is to be made Procedure of promotion i.e. Selection procedure or pre selection procedure Name of Member’s of the Departmental Promotion committee Remark (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 1. Deputy Director 5 Years Joint Director Merit-cum-Fitness 1. Chairman, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission or Member nominated by him -- Chairman 2. Principal Secretary /Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Culture Department --Member. 3. Commissioner/ Director, Culture and Archeology --Member. 4. Deputy Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Culture Department --Member. 2. Archaeological officer/ Publication Officer/ Numismatist/ Archaeologist/ Curator/ Epigraphist/ Chief Chemist/ Archive Officer/ Assistant Director (Level-12) 5 Years Deputy Director Seniority-cum-Fitness ----do---- 3. Assistant Director (Level-10) 8 Years Deputy Director ----do---- ----do---- 4. Deputy Engineer/ Draftsman 12 Years for diploma holder’s or 08 years for degree holder’s Assistant Engineer ----do---- ----do---- 5. Chemist 8 Years Chief Chemist ----do---- ----do---- 6. 2. Archaeological officer/ Publication Officer/ Numismatist/ Archaeologist/ Curator/ Epigraphist/ Chief Chemist/ Archive Officer/ Assistant Director (Level-12) 5 Years Deputy Director Seniority-cum-Fitness ----do---- 3. Assistant Director (Level-10) 8 Years Deputy Director ----do---- ----do---- 4. Deputy Engineer/ Draftsman 12 Years for diploma holder’s or 08 years for degree holder’s Assistant Engineer ----do---- ----do---- 5. Chemist 8 Years Chief Chemist ----do---- ----do---- 6. Technical Assistant (Writing) 8 Years Publication Officer ----do---- ----do---- 7. Senior Guide 5 Years Curator ----do---- ----do---- 8. (1) Supervisor (Level-9) 8 Years Archaeologist ----do---- (2) Excavation Assistant (Level-8) 11. Recently in the matter of Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (supra), while following the law laid down in the matter of Union of India and Others v Makhan Chandra Roy, (1997) 11 SCC 182 , the Supreme Court reiterated that the equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the executive and not the judiciary and, therefore, ordinarily courts will not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to expert bodies like the Pay Commissions, etc. The job evaluation in both the nature of duties discharged is required to be seen. The Supreme Court held thus at paras 13 & 14 : 13. In Union of India through Secretary, Department of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions v. T.V.L.N Mallikarjuna Rao, this Court reiterated the said position:— “26. The classification of posts and determination of pay structure comes within the exclusive domain of the executive and the Tribunal cannot sit in appeal over the wisdom of the executive in prescribing certain pay structure and grade in a particular service. There may be more grades than one in a particular service.” 14. In view of the afore-stated legal position, it clearly emerges that though the doctrine “equal pay for equal work” is not an abstract doctrine and is capable of being enforced in a Court of Law, the equal pay must be for equal work of equal value. The equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the Executive and not of the Judiciary. The equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the Executive and not of the Judiciary. The Courts therefore should not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to the expert bodies like the Pay Commissions which undertake rigorous exercise for job evaluation after taking into consideration several factors like the nature of work, the duties, accountability and responsibilities attached to the posts, the extent of powers conferred on the persons holding a particular post, the promotional avenues, the Statutory rules governing the conditions of service, the horizontal and vertical relativities with similar jobs etc. It may be true that the nature of work involved in two posts may sometimes appear to be more or less similar, however, if the classification of posts and determination of pay scale have reasonable nexus with the objective or purpose sought to be achieved, namely, the efficiency in the administration, the Pay Commissions would be justified in recommending and the State would be justified in prescribing different pay scales for the seemingly similar posts. A higher pay scale to avoid stagnation or resultant frustration for lack of promotional avenues or frustration due to longer duration of promotional avenues is also an acceptable reason for pay differentiation. It is also a well-accepted position that there could be more than one grade in a particular service. The classification of posts and the determination of pay structure, thus falls within the exclusive domain of the Executive, and the Courts or Tribunals cannot sit in appeal over the wisdom of the Executive in prescribing certain pay structure and grade in a particular service. 12. The aforesaid view has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the matter of DGOF Employees Association (supra). 13. In the case in hand, on the recommendation of the expert committee i.e. Brahma Swarup Committee, the entire set up was changed. The Committee may have considered the nature of duties and responsibilities the horizontal and vertical relativities with similar jobs, public dealings, satisfaction level and employer's capacity to pay recommended the set up and accordingly the Rules which have been framed by the State they were carried out accordingly. The Committee may have considered the nature of duties and responsibilities the horizontal and vertical relativities with similar jobs, public dealings, satisfaction level and employer's capacity to pay recommended the set up and accordingly the Rules which have been framed by the State they were carried out accordingly. We do not find any arbitrariness of the State action as the job evaluation is done by the expert body with the assistance of staff and it is not a case here, which shows that the expertise opinion was faulted on account of want of relevant data and scales for evaluating performances of different groups of employees. 14. In the result, the instant petition, sans substratum, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost(s).