1. By this Public Interest Litigation, the writ-petitioner has prayed forissue of appropriate writ, order and direction and thereby to quash and set aside the fixed-pay-condition imposed in the policy framed by the Finance Department by Resolutions KhRCh/2002/57/Z.1 dated February 16, 2006 and April 29, 2010 and to direct the respondent to pay minimum of the pay-scale available in the cadre of the employees who are appointed on regular permanent posts with deemed date effect in the interest of justice; or in the alternative, to direct the respondent to pay minimum wage to the fixed pay employees with corresponding effect of 6th Pay Commission with deemed date effect, i.e. January, 2006 with interest at 12%, in the interest of justice. The writ-petitioner has also prayed for quashing and setting aside the decision taken by the State Government dated February 24, 2011 and to direct the State Government to pay minimum wage to the fixed pay employees with corresponding effect of 6th Pay Commission with deemed date effect, in the interest of justice.

2. The case made out by the writ-petitioner may be summed up thus:

2.1 The Finance Department of the State Government has framedfixed-pay policy by Resolutions no. KhRCh/2002/57/Z.1 dated February 16, 2006 and April 29, 2010 and made recruitment on various permanent posts by giving advertisement and after following complete selection procedure.

2.2 The writ-petitioner, in the past, filed Special Civil Application No.11810 of 2008 before this Court, wherein this Court directed the State Government to decide the representation made by the writ-petitioner.

2.3 In spite of the directions given by this Court, the State Governmentnot having taken any decision, a reminder was sent to the respondent and as a last resort, when the representation was not decided, the writ-petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 2492 of 2009 which was ultimately decided on August 26, 2010. By the said order, the Court, inter alia, passed the following directions:

“5. From the aforesaid, it will be evident that the State Government is not guided by the Minimum Wages Act, and fixed the wages on the basis of recommendations of the Revision Committees, and taking into consideration the minimum pay which is received by regular employee, they have revised the fixed wages which is much more than the minimum pay fixed for the regular scale of pay. However, we find that pay has been revised by the Revision Committee on the basis of recommendations of 5th Pay Commission. Now, recommendations of 6th Pay Commission have been implemented with effect from January 2006, therefore, it is desirable for the State Government to determine the fixed wages of Class IV and Class III employees, taking into consideration the minimum wages fixed in pursuance of the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission corresponding to Class IV and Class III regular employees. The Government will also consider to do away with the contractual appointments by making the posts regular, if a fix pay post is continued for more than three years. Such decision should be taken within three months and be communicated to all the establishments with a copy to the Registrar General, High Court of Gujarat. The writ petition and the Civil Application both stand disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. No costs.”

3. The State Government set up a Cabinet Sub-Committee to take upappropriate decision and the Cabinet Sub-Committee submitted its report to the government and on consideration of the relevant papers, the government came to the conclusion that there was no need to make any change in the existing policy framed by the Finance Department vide Resolutions no. KhRCh/2002/57/Z.1 dated February 16, 2006 and April 29, 2010.

4. Being dissatisfied, the present writ-application has been filed.

5. According to the writ-petitioner, the appointments under the fixed-pay-scheme being made on permanent vacant sanctioned posts and the recruit