N. Pandey, J.

1. By means of these writ applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have raised a grievance that the respondents have practised discrimination in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, refusing to pay them salary in the scale of pay prescribed for similarly placed employees like supervisors appointed under the Adult Education Scheme. They have also invoked the doctrine of equal pay for equal work as enshrined under Article 39 (d)the Constitution. The contempt application (MJC 702/89) was filed for appropriate action against the respondent of C. W. J. C. No.8315 of 1988 on the allegation that they made an attempt to violate interim order dated 17.11.1988 passed in that case.

2. All these writ applications and the intervention applications, although on behalf of different petitioners but for the same relief, have been heard together and, therefore, are being disposed by this common judgment.

3. To have a brief survey of the factual background of the case with relative brevity, it will be appropriate to notice few facts : in the year 1978/79, the Central Government sponsored a scheme. "adult Educa