VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. Petitioner, by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks the relief of grant of higher pay grade in the scale of Rs.3000-4500/- as payable to a Scientist-D instead of the pay grade of Rs.2200-4000/- at which the petitioner was appointed as Scientist-C/Scientist Coordinator.

2. The facts of the case are that the respondent no.1 issued an advertisement in December, 1993 for various posts including the post of Scientist Coordinator. As per the subject advertisement, the pay grade/scale for the post in question was specifically advertised at Rs.2200-4000/-. Petitioner was selected and petitioner was appointed in terms of the Selection Committee report dated 24.2.1994. As per the recommendations of the Selection Committee petitioner though was granted a pay-scale of Rs.2200-4000/- yet, the petitioner began this pay-scale with four increments from the first date of appointment itself. This benefit the petitioner has got because of petitioner having the qualification of Ph.D in Physics without experience instead of the alternative eligibility criteria of appointment being M.Sc in Physics with experience. The petitioner had accepted this appointment but petitioner thereafter filed repeated representations for grant of pay-scale of Rs. 3000-4500/- instead of the pay-scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- with inbuilt four annual increments from the date of appointment, and as was granted to the petitioner when he was appointed with the respondent no. 1.

3. Petitioner claims that in view of the representations of the petitioner, a Grievance Committee was constituted and this Grievance Committee in its report observed that the grievance of the petitioner is genuine. As per the respondent no.1 the Grievance Committee however did not recommend grant of the higher pay grade but only recommended that petitioner be given the next promotion immediately on the same becoming due, and accordingly, petitioner was granted the promotion to the next higher pay-scale of Rs. 3000-4500/- w.e.f. 1.10.1998.

4. It may be noted that after the Board of the respondent no. 1 did not accept the recommendations of the Grievance Committee the petitioner had preferred a review but that review preferred by the petitioner before the Board was also rejected and so informed to the petitioner vide inter office memo dated 2.12.2002.

5. Petitioner further pleads in the writ petition that petitioner has been discriminated against because certain other persons who had Ph.D qualifications were granted higher pay grade but same benefit was not extended to the petitioner. This aspect of discrimination against the petitioner is by the petitioner comparing himself with six other persons as mentioned in para 14 of the writ petition.

6. The writ petition is a completely frivolous writ petition and is wholly misconceived. The writ petition is basically an endeavor to speculate by litigation. The writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed on various counts which are stated hereunder.

7. (i) The first reason for dismissal of the writ petition is that the petitioner is estopped from claiming a higher pay grade of Rs. 3000-4500/- inasmuch as the subject advertisement which was issued and under which the petitioner applied and was appointed prescribed the pay grade specifically and only as Rs.2200-4000/-. Petitioner therefore with open eyes applied under an advertisement in which a specific pay grade was mentioned and petitioner accepted that pay grade not only by applying as per the advertisement but taking employment/appointment in the pay grade of Rs. 2200-4000/-. Thus the petitioner has acted upon the advertisement as also the appointment letter, got such benefit of employment, and thus the petitioner is accordingly estopped from claiming a higher grade pay.

(ii) Another reason for the petitioner being estopped from claiming the higher