J.B.Koshy, J.

In these two writ petitions, petitioners question the action of the Election Commission directing the state Government to put on hole its decision to implement the recommendations of the pay commission from April, 2006. The pay of state Government employees was last revised in 1997. It is contended that as per previous practices, every fifth year there will be a wage revision. If that be so, pay ought to have been revised from march, 2002. Because of the demands from the Government employees, state appointed a pay commission and pay commission submitted its report. It was reported that pay commission would submit the report in March, 2006. Government decided to implement the pay commission report and budget allocation was also made. Paragraph 37 of the Budget Speech 2006-2007 made on 10-2-2006 is as follows:

“37. Government has already declared that the pay and allowances of the Government employees for the month of March, 2006 will be at the enhanced rates on the basis of pay revision. The date of effect of the pay revision will be determined after discussion with the leaders of political parties and service organizations.”

The pay commission report was submitted to the Government on 22-2-2006. On 1-3-2006, the Cabinet approved the pay commission report in principle and it was adjourned to a special meeting of the cabinet on 2-3-2006, but, on 1-3-2006, the Election Commission announced programme for election. It is the stand of the Election Commission that after the announced of the programme for general election, model code of conduct will come into force and, therefore, pay commission report cannot be implemented. The counsel for the Election Commission particularly relied on Ext.P1 Model code of conduct. Paragraph Vll sub-clause (vi) of the Model Code of Conduct is as follows:

“Vll party in power:

The party in power whether at the center or in the state or states concerned, shall ensure that no cause is given for any complaint that it has used its official position for the purposes of its election campaign and in particular…………..

(vi) from the time the elections are announced by the commission, Ministers and other authorities shall not—

(a) announce any financial qrants in any form or promises thereof; or

(b) lay foundation stones, etc., of any kind; or

(c) Make any promise of construction of roads, provision of drinking water facilities, ect.,

(d) Make any ad-hoc appointment in Government, public undertakings etc., Which may have the effect of influencing the voters in favour of the party in power.”

According to the counsel for the Election Commission, the pay revision will amount to financial grant in a form and may have the effect of influencing the voters in favour of the party in power and hence it cannot be implemented till elections are over.

2. According to the petitioners, code of conduct of election will come into force only after election notification is published Here, notification is not yet published. In Harbans Singh Jalal v. Union of India (civil Writ petition No.270 of 1997), a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana held that that model code of conduct adopted to be followed by all parties can be directed by the Election Commission to be followed from the date of commencement of election schedule by it and the contention of the petitioner therein that it can be brought into force only from the date of actual notification by the Governor of the State was rejected. According to the petitioners, even if such a view can be accepted in this petitioners, even if such a view can be accepted in this case, the pay commission was appointed and it gave its report much earlier to the announcement of the election by the Election Commission on 1-3-2006. The pay commission conducted various sitting, heard various organizations, collected evidence and then finally submitted its report on 22-2-2006. The pay commission was an in depend body and their report was submitted on 22-2-2006, much bef