JUDGMENT :

SATYEN VAIDYA, J.

1. By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:

“(i) Annexure A-8 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the respondent department may kindly be directed to rectify the above said anomalous position with respect to the grant of PGT Scale in favour of the applicant.

(iii) That the respondent department may kindly be further directed to grant the same pay scale to the applicant retrospectively from the date when the above said juniors, i.e. Roshan Lal and Gian Chand have been granted with all consequential benefits.”

2. Petitioner was appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) along with other incumbents vide office order dated 6.10.1975. The petitioner approached the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 957 of 2003, with a grievance that he was being paid less pay than his juniors in the same cadre. His representation to the competent authority had been rejected on untenable grounds.

3. Petitioner averred that his name figured at S. No. 36 of office Order dated 6.10.1975, whereas, the names of S/Sh. Roshan Lal and Gian Chand figured at S. No. 42 and 54 respectively of the same office order. I