Rumi Kumari Phukan, J.

1. Heard Domo Boje, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh, assisted by Ms. Pubi Pangu, learned Government Advocate, for State Respondents No. 1 to 4. The petitioner, by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for invoking the extra-jurisdiction of this Court, for implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), in toto.

2. The brief facts, of the instant case, are that, in compliance to the directives of the Central Government for implementation of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, the respondent authorities have issued the Office Memorandum dated 05.01.2008, under Order No. FIN/E-II/22/2008, by the Commissioner (Finance), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Boje, has contended that Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, is accepted by the State respondents and made applicable to the employees under the Government of Arunachal Pradesh as per their entitlement/admissibility from 01.01.2006 by notional fixation of pay in the revised pay band/structure with drawl and release of actual financial benefits, w.e.f. 01.01.2009.

4. It is further contended that the State respondent authorities have only partially implemented the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), for which, being aggrieved by the impugned action of the respondent authorities; the Confederation of Service Associations Arunachal Pradesh (CoSAAP) submitted a memorandum before the respondent authorities on 13.05.2009 for redressal of their grievances with a prayer for implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), in toto.

5. In response to repeated requests and Memorandums, the respondent authorities partially granted some of the allowances i.e. House Rent Allowances (HRA), Leave Travel Concession Allowances (LTC), etc., but to the utter dismay, the respondent authorities have not implemented the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), in toto, and have not granted important allowances like Children Education Allowances and Transport Allowances, for which the petitioner along with entire employees of various Departments of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh have been deprived.

6. Admittedly, the respondent authorities have accepted and implemented Traveling Allowance Rule/LTC, enhancement of quantum of Maternity leave and introduction of Child Care Leave (CCL), of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) vide Office Memorandums dated 23.07.2009 and 05.03.2012. However, despite several assurances, the respondent authorities are yet to grant Children Education Allowances Scheme, Reimbursement of Tuition Fees, Hostel Subsidy, Transport Allowances, Uniform Allowances, etc.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the State Government is the only implementing authority/agent of the Central Government until it constitutes its own State Pay Commission. According to the petitioner, it is mandatory for the State Government to implement all the provisions and schemes so recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission in letter and spirit and partial implementation of the same by the respondent authorities is utter total violation of the mandatory provision of 6th Central Pay recommendation and as such, it has caused wrongful loss and harassment to the petitioner.

8. As per Rule 3 of the Office Memorandum dated 30th August, 2008, the revised rate of all allowances, such as House Rent Allowances, Transport Allowances, Children Education Allowances, Special Compensatory Allowance, Special Duty Allowances, Hard Duty Allowances, etc., will be paid prospectively w.e.f. 01.09.2008 but the same have not been granted till date. The petitioner sent a Legal Notice to the respondents urging the implementation of all the schemes of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC).

9. In respo