JUDGMENT : ARUN MONGA, J. 1. Petitioner, a Class-IV employee is before this Court yet again. In what is, multiple foray of his which he is compelled to resort for redressal of his grievance. He, inter alia, seeks issuance of an appropriate writ, order and/or direction commanding the respondents to extend the benefit of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scale Rules), 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules of 1998’) to him for the period 12.01.2000 to 13.12.2005. 2. The writ petition was filed in the year 2011, and at first glance, it may seem belated. However, on considering the litigation preceding the instant round, aimed at enforcing petitioner’s rights, the tables are turned—the delay is actually attributable to the respondents. More of it later. 3. First the relevant facts as outlined in the petition. Same reveal that by virtue of an order dated 08.01.2000, the petitioner was provisionally appointed for one year to the position of a Class-IV employee, with a salary scale of Rs.750-12-870-14-940 (according to the pay scale of the IV Pay Commission) by respondent No. 4. Accordingly, the petitioner commenced duties on 12.01.2000. However, confirmation of the petitioner's appointment was contingent upon approval from the Ayurved Department, Ajmer. 3.1. Through a letter dated 31.07.2001, respondent No. 3 confirmed the petitioner's appointment. Subsequently, respondent No. 4, vide an order dated 30.09.2003, made the service of petitioner permanent effective from 01.04.2003. 3.2. Respondent No. 4/Institution receives 80% grant-in-aid from the Government of Rajasthan. All its employees, including the petitioner, draw their salaries from this grant. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to the salary scale and allowances commensurate with those received by employees of the Rajasthan State Government. 3.3. Upon the petitioner's appointment, his salary was to be fixed based on the corresponding pay scale of the V Pay Commission, and at that time, the Revised Pay Scale Rules of 1998 were in effect. Nonetheless, the petitioner and other employees under respondent No. 4 continued to receive salaries based on the old pay scale, i.e., Rs.750-940. 3.4. In the premise, the petitioner alongwith other employees was driven to file a writ petition before this Court being S.B.C.W.P. No. 470/2003: Raj Singh Malik & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Nonetheless, the petitioner and other employees under respondent No. 4 continued to receive salaries based on the old pay scale, i.e., Rs.750-940. 3.4. In the premise, the petitioner alongwith other employees was driven to file a writ petition before this Court being S.B.C.W.P. No. 470/2003: Raj Singh Malik & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. inter alia, praying that the respondents be directed to issue necessary sanction for giving the benefits of V Pay Commission i.e. Revised Pay Scale of 1998 to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.09.1996 with all consequential benefits. 3.5. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 12.07.2005 directing the petitioners to file a fresh representation and the respondent No. 2 –Secretary, Medical & Health (Group-IV) Ayurved, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur was directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law. 3.6. Upon the said fresh representation, an order dated 19.12.2005 was passed, vide which, while according sanction for giving benefit of the Rules of 1998 w.e.f. 01.01.2006 it was directed that, for the period prior to 01.01.2006, no additional financial grant was available and benefits for the said earlier period were thus frozen. Pertinently, while passing the order dated 19.12.2005 entitlement of benefit of V Pay Commission was otherwise not disputed or negated. 3.7. Being aggrieved by the order dated 19.12.2005, which extended the benefits of the V Pay Commission from 01.01.2006 to the petitioner, the petitioner and his other counter parts, filed another writ petition before this Court, bearing S.B.C.W.P. No. 3314/2006. The petition sought, among other things, the declaration of the order dated 19.12.2005 as illegal and invalid. Prayer was also made for its part quashing insofar as it denied the petitioners' right to have their emoluments fixed in accordance with the Revised Pay Rules, 1998, from the date the Rules came into force until 31.12.2005. 3.8. On 14.10.2008, by an order of this Court the said writ petition was allowed, and office order dated 19.12.2005 was modified. It was directed that the petitioners be granted all benefits as prescribed under the 1998 Rules from the date of their applicability. 3.9. Respondent No. 4, pursuant thereto, readjusted the petitioner's pay scale to Rs.2550-3500 effective from 01.01.2006. Petitioner was also granted the benefit of the first selection grade upon completion of 9 years of service starting from 12.01.2009. It was directed that the petitioners be granted all benefits as prescribed under the 1998 Rules from the date of their applicability. 3.9. Respondent No. 4, pursuant thereto, readjusted the petitioner's pay scale to Rs.2550-3500 effective from 01.01.2006. Petitioner was also granted the benefit of the first selection grade upon completion of 9 years of service starting from 12.01.2009. The petitioner's pay was then fixed in the next higher pay scale, i.e., Rs.2610-3540. Petitioner asserts/asserted that he is entitled to the benefits of the 1998 Rules, effective from 01.09.1996, from the date of joining duties, i.e., 12.01.2000. He was also entitled to arrears of salary difference from 12.01.2000 to 31.12.2005. He thus filed a contempt petition, bearing S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 228/2009, before this Court. 3.10. In response to the contempt petition, defense taken was that benefits for 34 writ petitioners were released after obtaining undertakings from them. However, for three writ petitioners, including the present petitioner, no grant was received by the respondent institution. Therefore, it was not possible to release the benefits as per the Rules of 1998. 3.11. The said contempt petition was thus dismissed by order dated 13.07.2011, with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. Hence the instant foray 4. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 have submitted a separate response to the writ petition. They assert that the respondent institution received grant-in-aid under the provisions of the Rajasthan Ayurved Grant-in-Aid (Relief) Rules, 1972. They further assert that the petitioner was not appointed in accordance with the procedures stipulated by the Rules of 1972. As a result, the department did not confirm the petitioner's appointment. 4.1. It is contended that the petitioner's appointment was temporary, only for one year, and confirmation was required from the Ayurved Department to make it permanent. However, the department never confirmed the petitioner's appointment. 4.2. According to the Rules of 1972, all Ayurved institutions must submit their application forms in the prescribed format to obtain grant-in-aid for aided posts under Rule 1 of Part II of the Rules of 1972 by June 30th of each year. Only after this submission, eligibility for grant-in-aid is determined, and the State Government subsequently provides aid to such eligible institutions on annual basis. The government did not provide any aid towards the petitioner's salary. 4.3. Only after this submission, eligibility for grant-in-aid is determined, and the State Government subsequently provides aid to such eligible institutions on annual basis. The government did not provide any aid towards the petitioner's salary. 4.3. Whereas, respondent No. 4 in its response avers that the institution did receive grant-in-aid as per the Rules of 1972. The petitioner is thus entitled to his salary under these Rules. Stand taken is that the order dated December 19, 2005, was issued by the respondent State, starting from January 1, 2006 and the Rules of 1998 were applicable read with applicable pay scale as per pay commission. 5. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and perused the case file. I shall now proceed to render my opinion thereof by recording reasons in the succeeding part. 6. First and foremost, let us see the relevant Rules of 1998 which for ready reference are reproduced herein-below: “5. Definition: In these rules, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context: (1) “Existing Pay Scale” means scale of pay applicable to a Government servant, but for the coming into effect of these rules, in respect of a post held by him immediately before 1st September, 1996 substantively or in officiating capacity while retaining lien on a permanent post or in a temporary capacity. 6. Scales of pay of posts: (i) as from the commencement of these rules, the Revised Pay Scale, for every post/service/cadre mentioned in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1989 as amended from time to time shall be as specified in Column 4 of Section ‘A’ of the Scheduled I against the existing pay scale shown in Column 2 of this schedule except revised pay scale of post specifically indicated in column 4 of Section ‘B’ of Schedule I. (ii) Revised Pay Scales for the Government servants drawing pay in Selection Grades of pay granted under Finance Department order No. F.20(1)FD(Gr.2)/92 dated 25-1-1992 as amended from time to time and for the Government servants drawing pay in Personal Pay Scales, shall be the corresponding pay scale as indicated in Column 4 against the Existing Pay Scale in Column 2 of Section ‘A’ of Schedule I appended in those rules. (iii) The pay scale of every post/service/cadre revised after 1.9.1996 shall be as specified in column 4 of Schedule V. 7. (iii) The pay scale of every post/service/cadre revised after 1.9.1996 shall be as specified in column 4 of Schedule V. 7. Drawal of pay in Revised Pay Scales: (i) Save as otherwise provided in these rules, a Government servant shall draw pay in the revised pay scale applicable to the post which he is holding on 1-9-1996 or to which he is appointed on or after 1-9-1996. (ii) In respect of any service/cadre or class of posts for which no rules regulating recruitment and conditions of service have been framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution or where a post/posts have not been included in the Schedule appended to the rules regulating recruitment and conditions of service, the academic qualifications and experience as prescribed by or with the concurrence of the Finance Department from time to time shall continue to be operative and shall be deemed to have been made applicable to such service/cadre or class of posts in the Revised Pay Scales with effect from 1-9-1996. 11. Fixation of initial pay: (1) The initial pay of a Government servant who elects or is deemed to have elected under Rule 10(3) to draw pay in the revised pay scale with effect from 1-9-1996 shall be fixed separately in respect of permanent post on which he holds a lien or on which he would have held a lien if it had not been suspended and in respect of officiating post held by him in the following manner, namely: (a)(i) The pay shall be fixed in the revised pay scale at the stage next above the pre-fixation emoluments. (ii) if the pre-fixation emoluments are less than the minimum of the Revised Pay Scale, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum. Provided that: The fixation thus made shall ensure that every employee will get atleast one increment in the revised scale of pay for every three increments (inclusive of stagnation increment(s), if any) in the existing scale of pay. (iii) In case the pre-fixation emoluments exceed the maximum of the revised pay scale, the pay shall be fixed at the maximum of the revised pay scale and the difference between pre-fixation emoluments and the maximum of the revised pay scale shall be allowed as personal pay to be absorbed in future increases in pay. (iii) In case the pre-fixation emoluments exceed the maximum of the revised pay scale, the pay shall be fixed at the maximum of the revised pay scale and the difference between pre-fixation emoluments and the maximum of the revised pay scale shall be allowed as personal pay to be absorbed in future increases in pay. (iv) where normal date of increment in existing pay scale falls on 1-9-1996 the pay in Revised Pay Scale shall be fixed on the basis of pay admissible in the existing pay scale on 1-9-1996 including increment. (v) In cases where pay is required to be fixed on 1-9-1996 itself under Rule 26 or 26A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, the pay shall first be fixed on 1- 9-1996 in the revised pay scale of the post held immediately before 1-9-1996 and there after under Rule 26 and 26A, as the case may be. (b) The fixation of pay in the revised pay scale shall be done in accordance with the provisions contained in clause (a) of sub-rule (1) as indicated in the fixation tables appended as Schedule III to these rules. These fixation tables would not be applicable for any other purpose except initial fixation of pay in the Revised Pay Scale. (2) The pay to a Government servant newly appointed to a post/service on or after 1-9-1996 shall be allowed in the Revised Pay Scale applicable to his post under these rules. The fixation tables in Schedule III shall not be applicable in such cases.” 7. As per Rule 6, the revised pay scale on the post in question, on which, the petitioner was recruited as on 01.08.2000 was 2550-55-2660-60-3200 as per Schedule-I, Section A, Rule 6. However, petitioner instead of being given the revised pay scale was put in the pay bracket of pre revised pay scale i.e. 750-12-798-13-850-15-940. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a regular appointee and in compliance of order dated 14.10.2008 passed by this Court, he was accorded regular pay scale as per the V Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006. Furthermore, he was also granted selection grade on completion of 9 years of service. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a regular appointee and in compliance of order dated 14.10.2008 passed by this Court, he was accorded regular pay scale as per the V Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006. Furthermore, he was also granted selection grade on completion of 9 years of service. Being so, on that short ground alone it is rather unfathomable that department having once conceded his claim by conferring the benefit of V Pay Commission read with the Rules of 1998 without any plausible reasons has now taken a somersault in not granting the further benefits to the petitioner on the same very first principles, which were applicable earlier on. 9. The lame excuse resorted by the department is that respondent No. 4 i.e. Registrar, Ayurved Vishva Bharti Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardarshahar, District Churu has not received the grant in respect of the petitioner from the sanctioning authority. To say the least, such an insipid stand taken by the respondents is being noted only to be rejected. Mere red tapism cannot be the ground to deny the benefits to the petitioner, who is a Class-IV employee. Whereas the other persons, who are superior in the hierarchy, have been given the same benefits. It is rather the responsibility nay bounden duty of the respondent No. 4 to make diligent endeavor to seek grant for its institution in respect of all the employees, more particularly, the ones who are in Class-IV bracket. Denial of benefits on that ground is legally not sustainable and is being noted only to be rejected. 10. There is another aspect of the matter i.e. hostile discrimination, which to say the least is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is fundamental right of every citizen to be treated equally. Whereas, it is the conceded position that similarly situated other persons have been granted the benefit of revised pay scale under the Rules of 1998 from the date of their coming into effect. I see no reason why the petitioner be not accorded the same benefit. 11. As an upshot of the discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to accord the benefit of revised pay scale w.e.f. 12.01.2000 to 31.12.2005. They are further directed to calculate the arrears of salary and the same be paid alongwith admissible interest as per the applicable service rules.