Honble MADAN, J.–The matter has been taken up on the second stay application moved by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Since the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as regards the maintainability of the second stay petition are touching upon the merits of the case, and the matter has been heard at length and it was thought proper to hear the arguments finally on the writ petition itself instead of keeping it pending as the writ petition pertains to the year 1998.

(2). The first contention which has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no prescription of different pay scales in the Rules. Second argument is that the impugned order has been passed retrospectively to the disadvantage of the petitioner particularly when the Rules do not permit retrospective effect to the matter.

(3). During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has laid emphasis on the contentions made especially in para 14, 15, 17 and 18 of the writ petition. He contended that the qualification which was prescribed for appointment to the post of Chemical Assistant is B.Sc. (Chemistry) and since the petitioner fulfilled the eligibilit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document