Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4643 (ALL)

Bhodhanram Upadhyay v. State of U. P.

2026-03-23

J J Munir

body2026
JUDGMENT : J.J. MUNIR, J. 1. This judgment will decide the present writ petition and connected Writ-A No. 2366 of 2016, where the petitioners, Bodhanram Upadhyay and Bhagwat Prasad Pandey, are common to both of them. Writ-A No.38906 of 2011 has been preferred by six writ petitioners on the basis of a common cause of action, whereas the connected writ petition has been preferred by the two petitioners, who are the first and the fifth petitioners in Writ-A No.38906 of 2011. Writ-A No.38906 of 2011 involves the question of the petitioners’ entitlement to salary carrying the grade pay of Rs.5400/- all teachers employed with Shri Dharma Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Saraiyan, District Chitrakoot. The connected writ petition involves the entitlement of the petitioners to receive pension, worked out on the basis of salary carrying the grade pay of Rs.5400/-. Writ-A No.38096 of 2011 has been heard as the leading case. Wherever facts, differential and specific to the case of the petitioners in the connected writ petition are necessary to notice, those would be mentioned. Else, facts would be noticed from the leading writ petition, common questions of facts and law being involved. 2. The petitioners, who are six in number, are or were (in case of retirement) teachers, employed in the Shri Dharma Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Saraiyan, District Chitrakoot, for short, ‘the Institution’. All the petitioners are teachers employed with the Institution, which is a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, imparting instructions to students, reading for their Purva Madhyama or Uttar Madhyama certificates. 3. It is not in dispute, what the petitioners assert, that prior to the current re-organization of Sanskrit institutions and colleges, vis-a-vis their institutional levels of teaching courses and affiliating bodies, done vide Government Order dated 07.01.1999, a Government Order dated 14.10.1974 prescribed the entire organization of Sanskrit institutions to impart instructions at various levels of courses and other related matters. The Government Order dated 14.10.1974 did not classify institutions teaching Sanskrit according to the levels of education imparted or the courses taught there. Under the system, that was enforced vide Government Order dated 14.10.1974, or may be continued under it, all Sanskrit institutions could impart education right from the Prathama or the Primary level to one that would lead to the Acharya or the postgraduate degree. The classification of institutions under the G.O. dated 14.10.1974 was very different. Under the system, that was enforced vide Government Order dated 14.10.1974, or may be continued under it, all Sanskrit institutions could impart education right from the Prathama or the Primary level to one that would lead to the Acharya or the postgraduate degree. The classification of institutions under the G.O. dated 14.10.1974 was very different. It classified all these institutions into four categories, to wit, first, second, third and the fourth category, called in the G.O. as 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga' and 'Gha' in that order. 4. The category of a Sanskrit institution, which could impart instructions of any level, was dependent upon the total number of enrolled students, those participating in different levels of examinations and the total percentage of students, passing the courses, where they wrote examinations. According to the Government Order dated 14.10.1974, the first category of Sanskrit institutions, or the 'Ka' category, was one where there was a minimum enrollment of 40 scholars and of them, every year 15 sat for the Shastri and the Acharya examinations. The further requirement was that an institution to be there in the 'Ka' category, apart from matters mentioned before, it had to have a result of35%. 5. In the 'Kha' or the second category of Sanskrit institutions, the requirement of total minimum enrollment was 40 scholars and amongst them, from Prathama to Acharya, 30 students would have to sit the examinations with the condition that a minimum of 5 students wrote their Shastri examination. It was also required that an institution of this category would have to ensure a minimum result of 35% in the Shastri examination. 6. The third category or the 'Ga' category of institutions comprised those where the minimum enrollment of scholars was 35, and from the Prathama to the Acharya level, at least 10 wrote their examinations. The further requirement was the result of the institution would at least be 35% from Purva Madhyama to Uttar Madhyama. 7. The fourth or the 'Gha' category of institutions comprised those where from the Prathama to the Acharya, there would be a minimum enrollment of 25% scholars, and from this minimum enrollment, at least 10 scholars reckoned from any level wrote their examinations. The further requirement was that the result would be a minimum of 35% in the examinations. 8. 7. The fourth or the 'Gha' category of institutions comprised those where from the Prathama to the Acharya, there would be a minimum enrollment of 25% scholars, and from this minimum enrollment, at least 10 scholars reckoned from any level wrote their examinations. The further requirement was that the result would be a minimum of 35% in the examinations. 8. The Government Order under reference further provided that category would be assigned to an institution bearing in mind its students, examinees and result assessed over the past two years. It was also provided that any institution, that was not already classified, would have the default category of 'Gha' or the fourth category, and the teachers there would be remunerated according to the said category. There were other provisions too, but apparently no further mention of the former organization of Sanskrit institutions is necessary to the issue involved. 9. The entire setup of Sanskrit institutions was novated in terms of two Government Orders issued in quick succession. The first was a Government Order dated 07.01.1999, followed by the Government Order dated 12.01.1999. In terms of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, the entire body of Sanskrit institutions was re-classified into three categories based on the level of education imparted. These categories were the Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya, Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya. According to the Government Order under reference, the Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya were to teach classes up to the Prathama level alone. The Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya would teach classes either up to the Purva Madhyama level or the Uttar Madhyama level. The Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya would exclusively teach courses leading to the degrees of Shastri and Acharya. 10. Since under the former organization of Sanskrit institutions, they were free to teach all level of courses, an option in the form prescribed was ordered by this G.O., asking institutions to put in their options, saying clearly which category they were entitled to claim, and, in that regard, the institutions would have to submit records for the past three years, giving the average strength of students. The options submitted along with records were required to be considered by the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya for the assignment of an institution to a particular category. 11. The options submitted along with records were required to be considered by the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya for the assignment of an institution to a particular category. 11. The Government Order dated 12.01.1999 endorsed the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, and, in particular, emphasized that the option letter to claim a particular category along with a letter carrying particulars or the necessary data relating to students enrolled in an institution would have to be submitted latest by 28.02.1999, in triplicate. It is of importance to note that these Government Orders spelt out clearly that instructions imparted to scholars after the re-organization of Sanskrit institutions would be 'level exclusive', to wit, an institution teaching degree and postgraduate courses, called the Shastri and the Acharya, would be precluded from teaching the levels of Uttar Madhyama and Purva Madhyama as well as Prathama. Likewise, the institutions teaching Uttar Madhama and Purva Madhyama would not, after the re-organization, be entitled to impart instructions to scholars reading for their Prathama. 12. Quite apart from the re-organization of Sanskrit institutions, there was a Government Order dated 10.07.1998 earlier issued, which said that teachers employed in Sanskrit institutions would be entitled to revised pay-scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996. The said Government Order apparently gave effect to a decision of the State Government, accepting the recommendations of the Pay Committee constituted by them vide resolution dated 09.10.1997 to revise pay-scales for teachers in the various educational institutions, which included, inter alia, Sanskrit institutions. The benefit of the revision of pay-scales recommended by the Committee, or apparently, to give effect to the recommendations of the 5 th Pay Commission, elaborate provisions were made by the Government Order about the manner of revision of pay- scales. And, it is apparent that this Government Order applied to Sanskrit institutions, besides other educational institutions. There is a schedule annexed to the Government Order providing for revision of pay-scales to teachers of various categories, but it mentions teachers from Inter Colleges to Primary Schools in the conventional system of education. There is no specific mention of Sanskrit institutions in the schedule, though there is a clear provision made for the revision of salaries to teachers of Sanskrit institutions in the body of the Government Order. There is no specific mention of Sanskrit institutions in the schedule, though there is a clear provision made for the revision of salaries to teachers of Sanskrit institutions in the body of the Government Order. It is emphasized by the petitioners that the Government Order under reference clearly provides that teachers of Sanskrit institutions would also be entitled to revised pay-scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996, apparently corresponding to the 5 th Pay Commission Report. 13. A further Government Order dated 20.07.2001 was issued, saying that teachers employed in primary and secondary level educational institutions would be entitled to revision of their pay- scales in accordance with the Central 5 th Pay Commission Report, which would be the same as that payable to teachers of equivalent level, serving the Central Government establishments. A schedule was again annexed to this Government Order dated 20.07.2001, providing a corresponding further revision of pay- scales to bring teachers in the State at par with their counterparts in the Centre. The schedule mentioned the revised pay-scale accepted for teachers of various grades w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in the State and the corresponding revised pay-scale based on the Central Pay Commission Recommendations. This revision also mentioned teachers in the conventional system of primary, secondary and higher education. 14. A Government Order dated 03.09.2001 was next issued modifying the earlier Government Order dated 20.07.2001 and another Government Order dated 08.08.2001 about the entitlement of teachers to receive revised pay-scales as provided there; and the modification was that the revision of pay-scale from 01.01.1996 to 30.06.2001 would be on a notional basis, with no entitlement to payment of revised emoluments from 01.01.1996 to 30.06.2001. As a part of this Government Order, it was provided separately that pay revision in terms of the Government Order dated 20.07.2001 would be applicable to teachers imparting education at the basic and secondary levels, equivalent to their counterparts, serving in the Central Government establishments. 15. Apart from other things, that would be noticed later in this judgment, the revised pay-scales were ordered to be provided from 01.01.1996 to June, 2001 on a notional basis with the higher pay-scales being actually payable w.e.f. 01.07.2001. 15. Apart from other things, that would be noticed later in this judgment, the revised pay-scales were ordered to be provided from 01.01.1996 to June, 2001 on a notional basis with the higher pay-scales being actually payable w.e.f. 01.07.2001. This Government Order of 3 rd September, 2001 has appended to it reckoners of pay-scales for various categories of teachers that were payable in terms of the 4 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1986, the corresponding pay-scales revised notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and that actually payable w.e.f. 01.07.2001. Of these, the fourth reckoner relates to Assistant Lecturers in a Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and Teachers in a Sanskrit Vidyalaya, which evidently bears reference to a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, as the petitioners assert. The aforesaid reckoners relating to revised salaries for the Assistant Lecturers (Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya) and Teachers (Sanskrit Vidyalaya) is given below: 16. In accordance with the re-structured organization of the Sanskrit Vidyalaya, as already asserted by the petitioners, the institutions, that were now differentiated according to the level of courses they would teach under the new system, were asked to submit their options in the prescribed form. On the basis of the option given by the Institution, Government Order dated 03.03.2004 was issued by the State Government in the Department of Sanskrit Education, accepting the Institution as a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya in the district of Chitrakoot, mentioned at serial No.6(44) of the list of institutions. There is a little cavil, therefore, that the Institution came to be classified as a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya. There is also an assertion that this Institution teaches both levels of classes permissible to a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, that is to say, the Purva Madhyama and the Uttar Madhyama. It is pointed out by the petitioners that whereas the Prathama, corresponds to the primary level of education in the conventional system, and involves teaching up to Class 8, the Purva Madhyama corresponds to the High School grade and the Uttar Madhyama to the Intermediate grade in the conventional system of education. Though not relevant, it is pointed out that in the Mahavidyalaya, the Shastri course and degree corresponds to the Bachelors' course and the degree under the conventional system of education, whereas the Acharya in Sanskrit Education has its equivalence to post-graduation in the conventional system of education. 17. Though not relevant, it is pointed out that in the Mahavidyalaya, the Shastri course and degree corresponds to the Bachelors' course and the degree under the conventional system of education, whereas the Acharya in Sanskrit Education has its equivalence to post-graduation in the conventional system of education. 17. It is asserted on behalf of the petitioners in paragraph No.16 of the writ petition that after classification of the Institution as a Madhyamik Vidyalaya, they were paid salaries according to the 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 27.05.2004 in terms of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. There is categorization of salaries payable to principals and teachers of institutions of various grades as re-classified in a 'Schedule' appended to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. 18. By a Government Order dated 18.10.2004, it was provided that institutions, which had opted for and been classified by the Government as Mahavidyalaya, teaching Shastri and Acharya courses, would remain affiliated to the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwa Vidyalaya, as it was earlier, but institutions which opted to teach courses up to the Uttar Madhyama would be disaffiliated from the Sampurnanand Vishwa Vidyalaya and affiliated to the Uttar Pradesh Madhyamik Sanskrit Shiksha Parishad. The Uttar Pradesh Madhyamik Sanskrit Shiksha Parishad, it is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, was established on the lines of the Uttar Pradesh Board of High School and Intermediate Education and would be the affiliating and examining body for all schools of the Prathama and the Madhyama level, which would include both Purva Madhyama and Uttar Madhyama. Teachers of Sanskrit Vidyalaya, that were affiliated to the newly established Uttar Pradesh Madhyamik Sanskrit Shiksha Board, would be entitled to revised salaries in accordance with the 5 th Pay Commission, provided they were functioning against sanctioned post in State Aided Institutions. At this stage, taking cognizance of the predicament of teachers of Sanskrit Institutions in the matter of indifferent payment of their salaries, the Government amended the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 (for short, 'the Act of 1971'), where the definition of institutions in Section 2(b) of the Act of 1971 was amended to provide as follows: “ 2. Definitions. Definitions. In this Act unless the contextotherwise requires: (b) “institution” means a recognized institution forthe time being receiving maintenance grant from theState Government and include a Sanskrit Mahavidayalaya or a Sanskrit Vidyalaya receiving maintenance grant from the State Government.”(Emphasis by Court) 19. By a Government Order dated 21.02.2007, pay-scale, selection pay-scale, and, promotion pay-scale, were provided for teachers working in Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and Sanskrit Vidyalaya on a time bound basis in the manner that upon completion of 10 years service, selection pay-scale would be payable, and, upon completion of 12 years service in the selection pay-scale, teachers to the extent of 20%, with a minimum of one post, would be entitled to the payment of promotion pay-scale. 20. A Government Order dated 19.03.2010 was issued providing for a tabulated reckoner of revised pay-scales and grade pay for teachers of various categories employed in Sanskrit Vidyalaya and Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya. It is the petitioners’ case that according to this Government Order and the revised pay- scale mentioned therein, they are entitled to the basic pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/-, a selection grade of Rs.6500-10,500/- with grade pay of Rs.4800/- and the promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- with grade pay of Rs.5400/-. 21. It is the petitioners' case that after re-organization of the Sanskrit institutions based on the level of courses taught, the Government Order dated 18.10.2004, already alluded to, provided for equivalence of the Purva Madhyama to the High School level and Uttar Madhyama to the Intermediate level, and, as such, the petitioners assert that teachers, teaching in Sanskrit institutions at these levels, were entitled to the 5 th Pay Commission pay-scales at par with teachers teaching High School and Intermediate classes under the conventional system of education. In fact, according to the petitioners, this was the provision made for remunerating teachers of Sanskrit institutions. They assert that they are entitled to be treated equally with their counterparts teaching the same grade of courses in the conventional system of education in terms of the Government Order dated 18.10.2004. 22. It is further pointed out that the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 provides for grant of revised pay-scales to the petitioners. Actual payment of revised pay-scales were made w.e.f. March, 2007. The petitioners have put in their demand to the State Government for the payment of revised pay-scales w.e.f. 27.05.2004. 22. It is further pointed out that the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 provides for grant of revised pay-scales to the petitioners. Actual payment of revised pay-scales were made w.e.f. March, 2007. The petitioners have put in their demand to the State Government for the payment of revised pay-scales w.e.f. 27.05.2004. The petitioners further say that they are, in fact, entitled to be given revised pay-scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996, going by the recommendations of the 5 th Pay Commission and also entitled to arrears from 01.01.1996 on the basis of pay-scales provided under the 5 th Pay Commission. The Finance Controller (Education Madhyamik), U.P. directed auditing of Sanskrit institutions and a report, which the petitioners dubbed as ex parte, was submitted without affording any opportunity to teachers in the Institution, including the petitioners. The audit report was submitted on24.03.2009. 23. This report, according to the petitioners, is founded on an arbitrary basis. It proceeds to fix scales for the petitioners on the basis of 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga' and 'Gha' categories of Sanskrit institutions, a classification that has been undone and substituted in terms of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. The old categorization of 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga' and 'Gha' institutions is absolutely lost. Nevertheless, the audit report proceeds to determine pay-scales according to the pre-reorganization category of Sanskrit institutions in the matter of determining pay- scales for their teachers, including the petitioners. It is averred that reference to the former categorization of the Institution for the purpose of fixing pay-scales, the petitioners would be entitled to, as done by the audit, runs counter to the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, which recognizes only three types of institutions on the basis of the grade of courses taught there, to wit, the Prathama institutions teaching the primary level, the Madhyama institutions, teaching either Purva Madhyama or both Purva and Uttar Madhyama, and the Mahavidyalaya teaching the Shastri and the Acharya courses. 24. The Institution, where the petitioners are employed, is a Madhyamik school teaching the Uttar Madhyama classes, including Purva Madhyama. The recommendations, according to the petitioners, made in the audit report dated 24.03.2009 to revise downwards the petitioners' pay-scales on the basis of the Institution's former classification, under the 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga' and 'Gha' categories, is ill-founded. 24. The Institution, where the petitioners are employed, is a Madhyamik school teaching the Uttar Madhyama classes, including Purva Madhyama. The recommendations, according to the petitioners, made in the audit report dated 24.03.2009 to revise downwards the petitioners' pay-scales on the basis of the Institution's former classification, under the 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga' and 'Gha' categories, is ill-founded. The petitioners say that by his order dated 05.05.2009, the District Inspector of Schools ('DIOS', for short), Chitrakoot, directed a downward revision of the pay- scales to the petitioners payable in terms of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. Based on the audit report dated 24.03.2009, a further order was passed by the DIOS on 30.04.2009, directing all Sanskrit institutions, including the Institution, to the effect that the fixation of pay for teachers done in accordance with the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 was found anomalous. The pay fixation upon examination has been directed to be revised and that according to the re-determined and revised pay fixation, excess payment made would have to be recovered. About the Institution, it was said that they did not present the requisite documents before the audit committee and they should do it at the earliest in order to ensure pay fixation for their teachers, that is to say, the petitioners. 25. Aggrieved by the downward revision of emoluments already fixed for the petitioners vide Government Order dated 27.05.2004 in terms of the orders of the DIOS dated 05.05.2009 and 30.04.2009, in turn based on the audit report dated 24.03.2009, and also the recovery of excess payment, determined in terms of these orders, the petitioners filed Writ-A No.31977 of 2009. This Court vide an interim order dated 01.07.2009 issued notice to the respondents and stayed recovery of the excess emoluments ordered. This writ petition was heard and decided vide an order dated 14.05.2010. The writ petition was allowed and the orders of the DIOS, impugned there, that is to say, the ones dated 05.05.2009 and 30.04.2009 as also the audit report dated 24.03.2009, on the basis of which the aforesaid orders were passed, were all set aside with liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. It was also provided that one of the petitioners, under authority of all others in writing, could represent them before the audit team or other authority. It was also provided that one of the petitioners, under authority of all others in writing, could represent them before the audit team or other authority. The audit team or the authority, which considers the matter, was ordered to give detailed reasons, in case the event went against the petitioners. It was also directed that if any particular document is required, either the petitioners or the DIOS may be ordered to produce the same. The reasoning, on the foot of which the aforesaid orders were made, figures in the judgment of this Court dated 14.05.2010 passed in Writ-A No.31977 of 2009 in the following words: “In para 17 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents nos. 1 to 6 it has been stated that pay scale of Rs. 5,500 -9000 is admissible to Madhyamik teachers and not for teachers working in Sanskrit schools and Principles of Sanskrit Schools are entitled only to pay scale of Rs. 6500 – 10500 and pay scale of 7500 – 12000 is admissible only to principle of Secondary Education School. The assertions made in para 17 of the counter affidavit are slightly confusing. Question of entitlement of a particular pay scale to the petitioners irrespective of G.O. dated 21.2.2007 is not directly involved in this matter. The only thing which the petitioners are claiming is that they were being paid the pay scale in accordance with Government order dated 21.2.2007. Accordingly the only thing required to be decided was as to whether the pay scale which was being paid to the petitioners was in accordance with G.O. dated 21.2.2007 or not. State authorities through counter affidavit can not go beyond the G.O. Neither in the audit report dated 24.3.2009 nor in the counter affidavit nor during arguments it could be clarified that what administrative order was required to be perused by the audit team which was not produced before it as per its report. Moreover petitioners were also not heard either during inspection or before preparation of the audit report.” 26. In compliance with the judgment and order dated 14.05.2010 passed by this Court in the writ petition last mentioned, the first petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.01.2011 on behalf of himself and the other writ petitioners of the last mentioned writ petition in a representative capacity, addressed to the Finance Controller (Secondary), asserting the petitioners’ stand in the matter. In compliance with the judgment and order dated 14.05.2010 passed by this Court in the writ petition last mentioned, the first petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.01.2011 on behalf of himself and the other writ petitioners of the last mentioned writ petition in a representative capacity, addressed to the Finance Controller (Secondary), asserting the petitioners’ stand in the matter. In compliance with the orders of this Court, a Committee, chaired by the Finance Controller, along with the DIOS, Chitrakoot and the Senior Accounts Officer, Directorate of Education, Allahabad as members, was constituted to take a decision in the matter afresh as directed. The Committee passed an order dated 17.02.2011, rejecting the petitioners’ claim to the basic pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/- and the promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- with a grade pay of Rs.5400/- in terms of the 5 th Pay Commission. Rather, the petitioners were held entitled to emoluments in terms of the audit report dated 24.03.2009, already set aside by this Court while passing the order of remand. 27. The audit report directed petitioner No.2, Moti Lal Tiwari, who is Principal of the Institution, to be entitled to the pay-scale of Rs.6500-10,500/-, whereas the other petitioners, who are teachers in the Institution, a Madhyamik institution of the Uttar Madhyama level, to the pay-scale of Rs.5000-150-8000/-. 28. Aggrieved by the order of the Finance Controller’s Committee dated 17.02.2011, the present writ petition has been instituted. 29. Parties having exchanged affidavits, this petition was heard along with the connected writ petition, which has been preferred by petitioner Nos.1 and 5 of the present writ petition alone. It is about their entitlement to receive pension, worked out on the basis of the basic pay-scale payable to a teacher of a Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) in terms of Government Order dated 19.03.2010, which is Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/- and the promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- with a grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The pension claimed by the petitioners in the connected writ petition was on the basis of the ten months' average emoluments last drawn, which were in the pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- and grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The pension claimed by the petitioners in the connected writ petition was on the basis of the ten months' average emoluments last drawn, which were in the pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- and grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The order impugned in the said writ petition held to the same effect as that regarding the petitioners' claim to emoluments involved in the leading writ petition, where the basic pay-scale determined for teachers as well as the solitary Principal of the Institution is anomalous and below that prescribed by the Government Order dated 19.03.2010. 30. Parties have exchanged affidavits in the connected writ petition as well. 31. Heard Mr. Chetan Chatterjee, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sharad Chandra Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the State in both the writ petitions. 32. The issue involved in both the writ petitions is if the petitioners are entitled to the pre-revised emoluments as teachers of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) in the basic pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/-; selection pay-scale of Rs.6500-10,500/- with a grade pay of Rs.4800/-; and, promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- with a grade pay of Rs.5400/- in terms of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, or they are entitled to the pay-scale of Rs.5000- 8000/- as determined by the audit report dated 24.03.2009, or after revision of the pay-scale in terms of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, to emoluments in the basic pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4200/-; selection pay-scale of Rs.5000-8000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/-; and, promotion pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4800/-. 33. This issue is wide enough to effectively determine the entire gamut of controversy involved in both the writ petitions. It is, however, clarified here that in case of petitioner No.2 in the leading writ petition, who is the Principal of the Institution, pay- scales and grade pay granted and claimed, would be different from the teachers, but based on common principles governed by the same Government Orders relevant to the issue. 34. It is common ground between parties that the organization and classification of Sanskrit Vidyalaya has undergone a generic change in terms of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. It was one set up before 07.01.1999 and a different system of organization of the Sanskrit Vidyalaya after 07.01.1999. 34. It is common ground between parties that the organization and classification of Sanskrit Vidyalaya has undergone a generic change in terms of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. It was one set up before 07.01.1999 and a different system of organization of the Sanskrit Vidyalaya after 07.01.1999. Broadly speaking, before 07.01.1999 under the Government Order dated 14.10.1974, all Sanskrit Vidyalaya would impart instructions to scholars in all courses of various levels from Prathama to Acharya. They were classified into Vidyalaya of 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' categories, dependent upon the total enrollment of scholars those sitting the examinations of a particular level or just sitting the examinations and the percentage result. The emoluments of teachers, as it appears, were prescribed at that time according to the category of the institution, to wit, 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha'. The further feature, common to all Sanskrit Vidyalaya before 07.01.1999, was that they were all affiliated to the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi, which was the affiliating, examining and certifying body, granting certificates and degrees to scholars of these institutions writing different levels of examinations. 35. After the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, there was a most fundamental change in the organization of the Sanskrit Vidyalaya. The institutions were classified into three categories alone based on the level of education imparted and the corresponding certificate or degree granted. These categories were Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya, Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya. According to the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, which was followed by the Government Order dated 12.01.1999, the higher courses of Shastri and Acharya were completely segregated from the lower courses taught up to Uttar Madhyama. The colleges, teaching the higher courses of Shastri and Acharya, were to be segregated from institutions teaching up to the Uttar Madhyama level. 36. This classification, as the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 would show, was essentially based upon the requirement of implementing the recommendations of the State Pay Revision Committee, 1989, whereunder the revised pay- scales payable w.e.f. 01.01.1996, apparently made the old mixed up classification of Sanskrit institutions unsuitable and obsolete. It was, therefore, that these institutions were segregated on the basis of the level of the course taught and the certificate and degree conferred. It was, therefore, that these institutions were segregated on the basis of the level of the course taught and the certificate and degree conferred. We would, therefore, be minded to think that the re-organization of the Sanskrit Vidyalaya into the three categories, based on the level of the courses taught, was brought about essentially to extend the revised pay-scales in terms of the Uttar Pradesh Pay Revision Committee, 1989, followed by the implementation of the Central 5 th Pay Commission for teachers, teaching in the State, receiving emoluments supported by State grant w.e.f. 01.01.1996. It would, therefore, in our opinion, be fallacious to think that the re-organized set up of Sanskrit schools had something to do with scholarship and teaching alone with no connection to the pay-scales that the teachers would be entitled to in the re-organized set up of Sanskrit institutions, teaching different levels of courses. It goes without saying that the set up introduced by the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 abolished the earlier classification of Sanskrit institutions brought about by the Government Order dated 14.10.1974, where all levels of courses were taught in all institutions. 37. The fact that under the re-organized set up or structure of Sanskrit institutions, based on the level of courses taught, was just not something relating to more or better organized teaching in the institutions, but had an intrinsic connection to the remuneration to be offered to teachers, teaching courses of different levels, is evident from a perusal of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999, the relevant part whereof reads: 38. We must remark here that so far as the succeeding Government Order dated 12.01.1999, that followed the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 close on heels, was intended to give effect to the re-organized set up of Sanskrit institutions. It insisted on submission of options to elect the level that a particular Sanskrit institution wanted to be recognized in and affiliated to the appropriate body. There is mention of an earlier Government Order dated 10.07.1998, speaking about revision of pay-scales for teachers employed in Sanskrit institutions in terms of the 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996, noticed hereinbefore. It insisted on submission of options to elect the level that a particular Sanskrit institution wanted to be recognized in and affiliated to the appropriate body. There is mention of an earlier Government Order dated 10.07.1998, speaking about revision of pay-scales for teachers employed in Sanskrit institutions in terms of the 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996, noticed hereinbefore. This Government Order, though relevant to the fact that emoluments had to be revised in terms of the 5 th Pay Commission, may not have much bearing upon the petitioners' entitlement to the particular pay-scale that they seek for reason that the petitioners' case is based upon a pay-scale under the re- organized system of Sanskrit institutions introduced by the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. 39. The Government Orders dated 20.07.2001 and 03.09.2001 essentially dealt with revision of salaries in tune with the Central 5 th Pay Commission recommendations, generally for teachers, and the date, with effect from which it would be reckoned and made payable. These Government Orders too do not bear much on the petitioners' entitlement, except to the extent that the Government Order dated 03.09.2001, which provided for revised pay-scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to June, 2001 on a notional basis with the higher pay-scales being actually payable w.e.f. 01.07.2001, has ready reckoners appended to it for various categories of teachers in different kinds of Sanskrit institutions of varying grade. One of the ready recknoners appended to the Government Order dated 03.09.2001 has been extracted in this judgment earlier. This particular reckoner relates to old pay-scales and revised pay-scales in terms of the 5 th Pay Commission for Assistant Lecturer (Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya) and Teacher (Sanskrit Vidyalaya). The reference to Teacher (Sanskrit Vidyalaya) in the reckoner is apparently one to Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, which would mean a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya, teaching up to the Uttar Madhyama level. The pay- scales noticed for both these classes of teachers start with the grade of Rs.5500/-. This too, though suggestive of some support to the petitioners' case about the pay-scales admissible to those of them, who are teachers in the Institution, does not have decisive bearing on their rights. 40. The petitioners say that they were paid salaries according to the 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 27.05.2004 in terms of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. This too, though suggestive of some support to the petitioners' case about the pay-scales admissible to those of them, who are teachers in the Institution, does not have decisive bearing on their rights. 40. The petitioners say that they were paid salaries according to the 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f. 27.05.2004 in terms of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. This assertion figures in paragraph No.16 of the writ petition, which the respondents in the three counter affidavits that they have filed, have not been denied. In paragraph No.8 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the various respondents, all that is said is that the contents of paragraph No.16 of the writ petition are matters of record. When one looks to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, which is the first decisive order about the pay-scales payable to teachers of the re-organized Sanskrit institutions, it is apparent that Principal and teachers for various categories, teaching in the three newly created classes of Sanskrit institutions, based on the level of courses being taught, have been provided new designations and pay-scales relative to those designations and class of institutions, details of which are mentioned in a schedule carried in the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. 41. We must remark here that the impugned order passed by the Finance Controller's Committee, virtually reviving the audit report dated 24.03.2009, has proceeded on utterly flawed premise. A perusal of the impugned order would show that the Finance Controller's Committee has invented a system of pay- scales, not at all envisaged under any of the Government Orders for teachers of Sanskrit institutions as re-organized vide Government Order dated 07.01.1999. The impugned order proceeds on the basis that classification of Sanskrit institutions, done by the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 and the subsequent orders too, is merely a teaching based or educational classification, that has no correlation to the pay-scales or grades, to which the teachers, teaching in these institutions, would be entitled. It is remarked that the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 has been issued to classify Mahavidyalaya and other Sanskrit institutions as equivalent to the conventional institutions, but with no provision for pay-scales there. It is said in the impugned order also that while re-classifying institutions, the Government had said that pay-scales of teachers for aided Sanskrit institutions would be separately decided as also their educational qualifications and designations. It is said in the impugned order also that while re-classifying institutions, the Government had said that pay-scales of teachers for aided Sanskrit institutions would be separately decided as also their educational qualifications and designations. It is remarked in the impugned order made by the Finance Controller's Committee that pay-scales for teachers of the Institution, which would include the Principal, would be governed by the old classification of institutions, where these were classified as institutions belonging to the first, second, third and the fourth categories, or so to speak, the 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' category institutions. 42. There are then very confounding remarks in the impugned order passed by the Finance Controller's Committee to the effect that the Education Directorate, Prayagraj had sought clarification in the matter from the Government and a Special Secretary to the State Government had opined vide his order dated 25.10.2009 that the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 mentions pay-scale according to their own classification and there is no correlation between the re-classified education level graded institutions with the scales of pay, to which the teachers would be entitled. A complete disconnect has been inferred by the Finance Controller's Committee based on Government opinion between the newly organized three levels of Sanskrit institutions, the classes of teachers mentioned for them and the pay-scales payable to them. The stand is that the pay-scales for teachers would be governed by the old classification of institutions before the re-organization of Sanskrit institutions vide Government Order dated 07.01.1999. To our understanding, the impugned order and also the opinion of the Government, on which it proceeds, if it is indeed so, is utterly flawed and manifestly illegal. 43. We must refer to the relevant remarks carried in the impugned order about all that we have found foul in it. The relevant part of the impugned order dated 17.02.2011 reads: 44. To show that what the respondents have said is demonstrably unsustainable and manifestly illegal, we must turn to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, which is a firm foothold for the petitioners' entitlement to the pay-scales they claim. This order must be quoted for every word if: 45. A reading of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 leads to the inescapable conclusion that this Government Order is not limited in its office to merely classifying Sanskrit institutions according to the level of instructions provided therein. This order must be quoted for every word if: 45. A reading of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 leads to the inescapable conclusion that this Government Order is not limited in its office to merely classifying Sanskrit institutions according to the level of instructions provided therein. The Government Order specifically speaks, working out an equivalence between the re-organized Sanskrit institutions and their counterparts in the conventional system of education, create different grades of teachers' posts in these re-classified institutions and prescribe their pay-scale. The schedule, which is part of paragraph No.1 of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, clearly shows that the first three posts, to wit, Principal, Professor and Assistant Professor, refer to institutions that under the new system are recognized as Mahavidyalaya. The posts at serial Nos.4, 5 and 6 are posts of Principal of Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), Principal, Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Purva Madhyama) and Principal, Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya. 46. The classification of these posts and the relative institutions show that Mahavidyalaya have been assigned category 'Ka', the Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) category 'Kha', the Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Purva Madhyama) 'Ga', and the Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya category 'Gha'. For each of these posts, the current and the revised pay-scale is indicated in the tabular chart in paragraph No.1. The categories of institutions specified as 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha', is not the same categorization as that under the old system before the Sanskrit institutions were re-organized under the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. The categories 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' mentioned in the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 is absolutely a new categorization, based on the level of education imparted in an institution or the class of institution, to wit, whether it is a Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, or a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Purva Madhyama) or a Sanskrit Prathamik Vidyalaya. 47. The old classification of institutions as 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha also called the first, second, third and fourth category institutions, was based on an absolutely different premise of the number of scholars reading, the number of scholars taking the examinations, and so on, of which we have spoken in detail hereinbefore. 47. The old classification of institutions as 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha also called the first, second, third and fourth category institutions, was based on an absolutely different premise of the number of scholars reading, the number of scholars taking the examinations, and so on, of which we have spoken in detail hereinbefore. Therefore, the impugned order, insofar as it says that the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, or for that matter the respondents, have not provided for pay-scales relative to the re- organized Sanskrit institutions based on the level of instructions imparted, but the classification of institutions according to the level of instructions imparted, is for the purpose of academic classification or gradation alone, is patently flawed. The impugned order is also flawed in relying upon the old classification of institutions 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha', as it existed prior to the re- organization of Sanskrit institutions under the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 for the purpose of determining the pay-scales payable, to which the petitioners are entitled. The old classification has been simply effaced with the issue of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. 48. The Government Order dated 27.05.2004, which also mentions categories 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' for the four categories of institutions specified and their teachers, vis-a-vis their entitlement to revised pay-scales and their current pay-scale, is based on the class of the institution, worked out on the basis of the level of education imparted there, that is to say, Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) etc. These categories mentioned in the table that occurs in the Government Order dated 27.05.2004 has nothing to do with the old categorization of Sanskrit institutions as 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' or the first, second, third and fourth categories, which have become extinct. The impugned order, therefore, in proceeding on the basis that pay-scales are to be determined according to the old classification of institutions and the scales payable there, is manifestly illegal, as already remarked. 49. We would identify the 'Kha' category of Institution at serial No.4 of the schedule carried in the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, where the Principal of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) is mentioned. The existing pay-scale mentioned in the schedule, occurring in paragraph No.1 of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, is Rs.6500-10,500/-. This is for the Principal of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) and the revised pay-scale is Rs.7500-12,000/-. The existing pay-scale mentioned in the schedule, occurring in paragraph No.1 of the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, is Rs.6500-10,500/-. This is for the Principal of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) and the revised pay-scale is Rs.7500-12,000/-. At serial No.7 of the said schedule for the teacher of a school in the 'Kha' category, that is to say, a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), the existing pay-scale on the date of the G.O.was Rs.4500-7000/- and the revised pay-scale, Rs.5500-9000/-. 50. For the Principal of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Purva Madhyama), occurring at serial No.5 of the schedule, part of the G.O. under reference, the category mentioned is 'Ga', the existing pay-scale Rs.4500-7000/- and the revised pay-scale Rs.6500- 10,500/-. For a teacher, teaching in a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Purva Madhyama), details of pay-scales and other particulars are mentioned at serial No.8 of the table under reference. The existing pay-scale mentioned is Rs.4250-6400/- and the revised pay-scale, Rs.4600-7000/-. These pay-scales, we would soon revert to in order to determine the petitioners'entitlement. 51. For the moment, we pause and say that the findings in the impugned order that the respondents have not at all determined pay-scales based on the re-classified Sanskrit institutions, a classification done for academic or teaching purposes and related matters alone, are misconceived. The Government Order dated 27.05.2004 clearly fixes pay-scales for different grades of teachers in the various classes of institutions, re-organized in terms of the Government Order dated 07.01.1999. Conclusions to the contrary drawn by the Finance Controller's Committee, carried in the order impugned, are perverse and based on more than one errors apparent. 52. There is one aspect of the matter, which merits consideration. Though not brought on record of the leading writ petition, but in the connected matter, which is an extension of the same cause of action as that involved in the leading petition, limited to the question of pension for the first and the fifth petitioners here, there is on record a Government Order dated 19.03.2010, annexed as Annexure No.2 to the connected writ petition. This Government Order is a later day development about the revision of grades and pay-scales payable to teachers of the various re-organized Sanskrit institutions and Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, down to the Prathamik Sanskrit Vidyalaya. 53. This Government Order is a later day development about the revision of grades and pay-scales payable to teachers of the various re-organized Sanskrit institutions and Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, down to the Prathamik Sanskrit Vidyalaya. 53. The impugned order was passed on 17.02.2011 and there can be no cavil that when the said order was passed by the Finance Controller's Committee, the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 was in existence. Now, the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 extensively provides for and deals with pay-scales for different grades of teachers in the different classes of re- organized Sanskrit institutions. It depends on a six-columned table and provides for a particular post of teacher in a particular grade of Sanskrit institution, the current ordinary scale of pay, the current selection pay-scale and the current promotion pay-scale, all in column-3 and then mentions against each existing pay- scale, the revised pay-scale in column-4 and the grade pay in column-6. The Government Order dated 19.03.2010 also says that the revised pay-scales would be notionally payable w.e.f.01.01.1996 and the actual benefits would accrue from 01.12.2001. This Government Order again must be quoted in extenso: 54. A perusal of this Government Order shows that here grades have been assigned to different classes of teachers in various categories of Sanskrit institutions, where no category, like 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' even for the sake of identification of the new found categories, has been mentioned. This Government Order mentions the category of the institution and the post held by a teacher with the relative pre-revised and the revised pay-scale together with the grade pay. A perusal of this Government Order shows that in the first column is mentioned the category of each institution. At serial No.2 of column-1 is mentioned Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama). Occuring at serial No.1 is the post of the Principal mentioned in column-2. The ordinary pay-scale for the Principal, that was current or pre-revised, is Rs.7500-12,000/-. The revised pay-scale mentioned in column-4 for the Principal of this class of institution is Rs.8000-13,500. The grade pay in column-6 is Rs.5400/-. The selection grade for the Principal of the Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) is Rs.8000-13,500/- before its revision, as mentioned in column-3 and post revision it is Rs.10,000-15,200/-. The grade pay is Rs.6600/- mentioned in column 6. The revised pay-scale mentioned in column-4 for the Principal of this class of institution is Rs.8000-13,500. The grade pay in column-6 is Rs.5400/-. The selection grade for the Principal of the Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) is Rs.8000-13,500/- before its revision, as mentioned in column-3 and post revision it is Rs.10,000-15,200/-. The grade pay is Rs.6600/- mentioned in column 6. For a teacher in a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), which is mentioned at serial No.2 of the second column, the ordinary pay-scale before revision is Rs.5500-9000/-, the revised pay-scale Rs.7450- 11,500/- mentioned in the fourth column and the grade pay is Rs.4600/-. The selection pay-scale before revision payable to a teacher of this category of institutions mentioned in column-3 is Rs.6500-10,500/- and the grade pay mentioned in column-6 is Rs.4800/-. The promotion pay-scale stipulated for a teacher in this category of institution before revision is Rs.7500-12,000/- and after revision, it is mentioned in column-4 as Rs.8000-13,500/-.The grade pay stipulated in column-6 is: Rs.5400/-. 55. The second petitioner in the leading writ petition, Moti Lal Tiwari, claims his emoluments in the pay-scales determined in accordance with the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, whereas petitioner Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 also claim according to the aforesaid Government Order. The claim for each of the petitioners is based on their position as Principal or teachers of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama). 56. The next question to be answered is, if the petitioners are indeed Principal and teachers of the Institution, which is a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama). In order to determine this fact, we must hark back to the Government Order dated 03.03.2004, by which options called from institutions pursuant to the Government Order dated 07.01.1999 to elect their category according to the levels of re-classified Sanskrit instructions were accepted by the Government. The enclosed list of institutions to the Government Order dated 03.03.2004 in the relevant part reads: 57. A reading of the Government Order dated 03.03.2004 makes it abundantly clear that the Institution, that was classified in whatever way under old classification of Sanskrit institutions prior to 07.01.1999, was on their option, accepted and recognized as a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama). A reading of the Government Order dated 03.03.2004 makes it abundantly clear that the Institution, that was classified in whatever way under old classification of Sanskrit institutions prior to 07.01.1999, was on their option, accepted and recognized as a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama). There is, thus, not even the slightest doubt that the petitioners, whether teachers in the Institution or the Principal, would be entitled to the pay- scale determined for the Principal or teacher of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) in terms of the Government order dated 19.03.2010. 58. We have also looked into the audit report dated 24.03.2009 resurrected by the impugned order, though set aside by this Court earlier while remanding the matter to the respondents. The said report has incorrectly downgraded the petitioners' pay-scales, which were already fixed correctly for them in accordance with the Government Order dated 27.05.2004. The earlier fixation done for the petitioners, that was disturbed by the audit report dated 24.03.2009 and now by the impugned order, was correctly done according to the relevant Government Orders in force from time to time and now buttressed by the Government Order dated19.03.2010. 59. Astonishingly, the impugned order passed by the Finance Controller's Committee, of which he is a member, himself has not at all taken note of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010. Had the Committee looked into the said order, all their misgivings and utter misconceptions, that have now turned into errors apparent, would have been dispelled. There is no discretion involved in the matter or the possibility of drawing two different conclusions regarding pay-scales payable to teachers of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) and the Principal as well. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the respondents again and putting a premium on the petitioners' lives, who have litigated for long and are now in the twilight years of their life. 60. We would, therefore, think that the impugned order dated 17.02.2011 ought be quashed and a mandamus issued to restore the petitioners' respective salaries paid to them in accordance with the 5 th Pay Commission pursuant to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, as revised by the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 together with all arrears. 60. We would, therefore, think that the impugned order dated 17.02.2011 ought be quashed and a mandamus issued to restore the petitioners' respective salaries paid to them in accordance with the 5 th Pay Commission pursuant to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, as revised by the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 together with all arrears. We would think that emoluments reduced in terms of the audit report dated 24.03.2009 ought be restored and revised on that basis with arrears worked out accordingly, and paid to the petitioners within three months. 61. So far as the connected writ petition is concerned, it has been instituted by the first and the fifth petitioners of the leading writ petition alone. They have sought quashing of the order dated 02.12.2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi, determining their pension and prayed for a mandamus to fix their pension according to the pay fixation for the last ten months. These petitioners retired from service on 30.06.2014. The petitioners’ pension fixation was done vide order dated dated 29.09.2014 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi. The petitioners objected to the fixation of pension based on an incorrect fixation of salary. They filed objections on 09.11.2014. It was after a direction issued by this Court on 27.10.2015 in Writ-A No.60203 of 2015 that the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik) determined the petitioners’ pension, albeit incorrectly by the order impugned dated 02.12.2015. 62. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioners’ pension has been incorrectly fixed on the basis of an opinion by the Finance and Accounts Officer, Regional Audit Unit to the effect that the assistant teachers of 'Gha' category in terms of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, are entitled to an ordinary pay-scale with a grade pay of Rs.4200/-, a grade pay in the selection pay-scale of Rs.4600/- and grade pay in the promotion pay-scale of Rs.4800/-. 63. We have already considered this Government Order to opine that there is no 'Gha' category of institutions mentioned in the Government Order dated 19.03.2010. The Government Order under reference is as clear as mirror. In the case of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), which the Institution clearly is, there is no post of an assistant teacher. The posts are of teacher and the Principal. The Government Order under reference is as clear as mirror. In the case of a Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama), which the Institution clearly is, there is no post of an assistant teacher. The posts are of teacher and the Principal. The ordinary pay-scale for a teacher of the Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) is Rs.5500-9000/- with a grade pay of Rs.4600/-, selection pay-scale of Rs.6500-10,500/- with a grade pay of Rs.4800/- and promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- with a grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The petitioners have come up with a specific case in paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the writ petition that they are entitled to the pay-scale with a grade pay of Rs.5400/- and were paid the aforesaid pay- scale in terms of the Government Orders dated 19.03.2010 and 12.02.2012, where their monthly salary was Rs.21,220/- and grade pay Rs.5400/-, with total monthly emoluments being Rs.26,620/-. 64. In the counter affidavit filed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi, who passed the impugned order, the stand taken in paragraph No.15 is that the contents of paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the writ petition are denied and it is said that the Finance Accounts Officer has done a pay fixation for the petitioners on the basis of the grade pay of Rs.5400/-, whereas according to rules, teachers of fourth class ('Gha' category institutions) were given grade pay of Rs.4200/- in the ordinary pay-scale, grade pay of Rs.4600/- in the selection pay-scale and a grade pay of Rs.4800/- in the promotion pay- scale as per Government Order dated 19.03.2010. We have already opined that the aforesaid reading of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 is founded on perverse reasoning. The Government Order clearly provides that teachers of Sanskrit Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Uttar Madhyama) would be entitled to the ordinary pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000/- (pre-revised) with grade pay of Rs.4600/-, selection pay-scale of Rs.6500-10,500/- (pre- revised) with grade pay of Rs.4800/- and promotion pay-scale of Rs.7500-12,000/- (pre-revised) with a grade pay of Rs.5400/-. 65. To read into this scheme of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, a 'Gha' category institution under the abolished 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' category system of Sanskrit institutions, classified on a completely different criteria, is a misconceived opinion of the highest order. It cannot be countenanced and must be immediately undone. 65. To read into this scheme of the Government Order dated 19.03.2010, a 'Gha' category institution under the abolished 'Ka', 'Kha', 'Ga', 'Gha' category system of Sanskrit institutions, classified on a completely different criteria, is a misconceived opinion of the highest order. It cannot be countenanced and must be immediately undone. Since the fact is not disputed that earlier the petitioners were paid emoluments in the grade pay of Rs.5400/-, its erroneous reduction and determination of the petitioners’ pension, below their entitlement, must be undone and worked out on the basis of their entitlement, that is to say, on a pay-scale that carries the grade pay of Rs.5400/-. 66. We would think, therefore, that the impugned order dated 02.12.2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi, deserved to be quashed and the petitioners’ pension determined on the basis of the last salary drawn that carries the grade pay of Rs.5400/-. They would be entitled to arrears of pension on the basis of a revision thereof done from the date they are being paid their pension, within a period of three months from the date of communication of this judgment. 67. In the result, both the writ petitions succeed and are allowed . The impugned order dated 17.02.2011 passed by the Finance Controller’s Committee is hereby quashed. A mandamus is issued to restore the petitioners’ respective salaries paid to them in accordance with the 5 th Pay Commission pursuant to the Government Order dated 27.05.2004, as revised by the Government Order dated 19.03.2010 and subsequent Government Orders, together with all arrears. The emoluments reduced by dint of the audit report dated 24.03.2009 shall stand restored to the pay-scale being paid before the said report and revised on that basis with arrears worked out accordingly. The arrears of salaries shall be paid to the petitioners in the leading writ petition within three months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment by the respondents. The order impugned in the connected writ petition dated 02.12.2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi is hereby quashed . The pension payable to the petitioners in the connected matter shall be re-determined on the last drawn salary, carrying the grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The order impugned in the connected writ petition dated 02.12.2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Education (Madhyamik), Jhansi Region, Jhansi is hereby quashed . The pension payable to the petitioners in the connected matter shall be re-determined on the last drawn salary, carrying the grade pay of Rs.5400/-. They shall be paid arrears of pension on a revision thereof done from the date they are being paid their pension within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this judgment by the respondents. 68. Costs easy in both petitions. 69. Let a copy of this judgment be communicated to the Director of Education (Secondary), U.P., Lucknow, the Additional Director of Education (Secondary), U.P., Prayagraj, the Finance Controller, Directorate of Education (Secondary), U.P., Prayagraj, the Deputy Director of Education (Sanskrit), Directorate of Education, U.P., Prayagraj, the Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Jhansi Region, Jhansi and the District Inspector of Schools, Chitrakoot by the Registrar (Compliance).