JUDGMENT

K. Venkataswami, J.-The members of the respondent-Association who were appointed in the Directorate of Information after 1.4.1965 moved the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the appellant to give them pay scale of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants at par with employees working in the Secretariat U.P.

2. The High Court accepting their prayer issued a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to give the pay scale as prayed for in writ petition. Aggrieved by that, the present appeal is filed by special leave.

3. Before 1.4.1965, the ministerial employees of the Directorate of Information and U.P. Secretariat were in the same pay-scales because there was a joint set up of the Directorate of Information and U.P. Secretariat. The Government of U.P. appointed a committee on 13.7.1964 for rationalization of pay-scales and other conditions of service of various grades of State Government employees. One of the recommendations of the said committee was that the pay scales for the employees of the Directorate of Information should be like the pay scales of the employees working under other heads of Department. This recommendation was accepted and give effect to by the Government w.e.f. 1.4.1965. Consequently, those who were appointed subsequent to 1.4.1965 in the Directorate of Information were paid in the revised pay scale which was not the same as given before but something less than what it was before 1.4.1965. At the same time, the employees who were already there in the Directorate and appointed before 1.4.1965, their pay scale was protected.

4. In the circumstances, the employees of the Association moved the High Court on earlier occasion by filing W.P. 5203/85 pointing out the discrimination in the pay scales on the basis of date of appointment, namely those who were appointed prior to and after 1.4.1965. The High Court while disposing of the writ petition directed the State Government to consider the cases of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants for the same pay scale as that of employees of the Secretariat.

5. Pursuant to the judgment of the High Court, the Government carefully considered the case of the Lower and Upper Division Assistants working in the Department of Directorate of Information. By Office Memorandum dated 21.6.1990, the Government by a considered and reasoned order declined to concede the demand of the members of the respondent Association. Aggrieved by that, the respondent-Association again moved the High Court and the result was the order under appeal.

6. After going through the order impugned before the High Court, namely, the Office Memorandum dated 21.6.1990 and after perusing the pleadings and hearing counsel on both sides, we entertained a feeling that if only the High Court had taken the trouble of going through the order impugned before it carefully, it would not have issued the mandamus as prayed for by the respondent-Association.

7. The reason given by the High Court for issuing the writ of mandamus accepting the case of the respondent-Association were mainly (a) that the academic qualifications for appointed to most of the Lower/Upper Division Assistants in the Secretariat and the Information Department are similar, that (b) in the same Directorate of Information those who were appointed prior to 1.4.1965 were paid on a higher scale than those appointed after 1.4.1965 and such discrimination has not been properly explained and (C) that the unequal scales of pay is actually based on no classification or irrational classification.

8. None of the above reasoning can stand the scrutiny in view of the detailed convincing reasons given in the Office Memorandum dated 21.6.1990 and also in the counter affidavit filed before the High Court. We prefer to extract portions from Office Memorandum dated 21.6.1990 to justify the above statement. The Office Memorandum, inter alia, stated as follows :

"Before 1.4.1965, the Information Directorate and