Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39454 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1924 of 2024 Petitioner :- Bhupendra Pratap Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Secondary Edu. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Bajpai,Bhanu Bajpai,Sachin Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard Shri Bhanu Bajpai and Shri Sachin Shukla, learned counsels for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. Under challenge is the order dated 14.05.2019 passed by respondent no. 3, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition. Further prayer is for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to redetermine the salary and pension of the petitioners as admissible to similarly situated persons vide letter dated 07.04.1989 and the consequential benefits. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that earlier the petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by various orders by which pay fixation of the petitioners had been made and recovery was also directed. The writ court vide judgement and order dated 28.11.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 5662 (SS) of 2006 in re: Bhupendra Pratap Singh and others vs State of U.P., a copy of which is annexure 12 to the writ petition, had quashed the said orders and had directed the respondents to extend the benefit of judgement and order dated 19.07.1993 passed in Writ Petition No. 240 of 1989 and also benefit of Government Order dated 04.07.1996 and the petitioner was also granted interest @ 9% per annum towards the amount as had been withheld by the respondents. Subsequent thereto the respondents have passed the order impugned dated 14.05.2019 whereby the pay of the petitioner has been re-fixed in purported compliance of order passed by Writ Court. 4. The grievance of the petitioners is that although both the petitioners have been indicated as Physical Education Instructors as would be apparent from perusal of order impugned and pay fixation has been made in the pay scale Rs 330-550 yet the respondents themselves vide the order dated 07.04.1989, a copy of which is annexure no. 5 to the writ petition, so far as it pertains to Physical Education Instructors has indicated the pay scale of Rs 540-910 and 450-720 and in the same order the pay of Rs 700 with effect from 01.07.1979 has been granted to Physical Education Instructors. 5. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that perusal of pay fixation of petitioners would indicate that pay scale of 330-550 is indicated against their names and the pay as on 01.07.1979 has been indicated as Rs 480 with respect to both the petitioners which would not be in consonance with the order dated 07.04.1989 as has been passed by the respondents themselves. Specific averment to the said effect has been made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition. 6. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that once persons similarly circumstanced i.e. Physical Education Instructors have been granted pay of Rs 700 as on 01.07.1979 in a particular pay scale consequently there would not be any occasion for the respondents to have fixed the pay of the petitioner in a lower pay scale and on a lower pay vis a vis others and thus the order impugned merits to be set aside on this ground alone. 7. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has argues that the order impugned has correctly been passed. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record it emerges that in earlier round of litigation writ court vide judgement and order dated 28.11.2018 had quashed the pay fixation orders of the petitioners and had directed the respondents to pass a fresh orders and amount as had been recovered was also directed to be refunded alongwith interest. In pursuance of liberty granted by Writ Court the respondents have passed the order impugned dated 14.05.2019 fixing the pay of the petitioners. 9. Bare perusal of order impugned would indicate that with respect to petitioners their pay scale has been indicated towards Physical Education Instructors as Rs 330-550 and as on 01.07.1979 their pay is indicated as Rs 480. At the same time the order dated 07.04.1989 would indicate that the pay scale of Physical Education Instructors has been indicated as Rs 540- 910 and Rs 450-720 and the pay of various Physical Education Instructors has been fixed at Rs 700 as on 01.07.1979. 10. Specific averment to the said effect has been made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition which incidentally has not been denied by the respondents while filing the counter affidavit more particularly in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit which indicates that the averments made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition need no comments being a matter of record. 11. Considering the aforesaid and there being no specific denial of pay scale of Physical Education Instructors being higher and as on 01.07.1979 and others having been granted the pay of Rs 700 vis a vis the pay fixation of the petitioner as on 01.07.1979 which is indicated as Rs 480 consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 14.05.2019, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition, is quashed. 12. The respondents are directed to fix the pay of the petitioners at par with those fixed by the order dated 07.04.1989 i.e. the pay of Rs 700 fixed with respect to the petitioners with effect from 01.07.1979 with all consequential benefits including pension and other dues. 13. Let the order be complied within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 14. The arrears arising from the aforesaid would also be paid, if any, within the aforesaid period of time alongwith admissible interest. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 J. K. Dinkar Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench