(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3) THE question that arises for consideration is whether the High Court committed an error in denying arrears of pay to the appellant S.M. Mansoor while it granted such relief to the other petitioner Md. Ali.

(4) THE thrust of the submission of Shri P.S. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant was that the appellant and Md. Ali were both placed in similar situation and the case pleaded by them in the writ petition was similar. Indeed, both of them were proceeded against on similar charges and were visited with the same order of punishment of stoppage of increments. In the case of Md. Ali the High Court quashed the punishment order, whereas in the case of the appellant the State Government itself recalled the order of punishment. Thereafter both the persons were given promotion to the higher posts but denied arrear pay. Faced with the situation they jointly filed the writ petition which was disposed of by the impugned order.

(5) THE further submission of Shri Mishra is that neither the learned Single Judge nor the Division Bench gave any specific reason for making