Hon’ble C.K. Prasad, C.J.—This Special Appeal at the instance of respondent-appellants under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 arises out of a judgment and order dated 22.8.2008 passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 1378 (S/S) of 2008 whereby while allowing the writ petition, he has directed for payment of pensionary benefits to the petitioner.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the writ petitioner-respondent, hereinafter referred to as the ‘writ petitioner’, was initially appointed as Collection Amin (Taquabi Amin) on 15.5.1972. Thereafter, the State Government took a decision to abolish the scheme under which the petitioner was appointed. Accordingly, a Government Order was issued to terminate the services of 14000 Collection Amins including the writ petitioner. Thereafter, a certificate was issued on 28.8.1975 by the District Agricultural Officer, Sultanpur certifying that the employment of the writ petitioner had been terminated with the abolition of post by the State Government by a Government Order and the writ petitioner had been treated as retrenched employee. Challenge made to the aforesaid decision of retrenchment before this Court in Writ Petition No. 2077 of 1975 failed. Thereafter, the State Government took a policy decision to absorb the retrenched Collection Amins in different phases in different Government Departments of the State. Ultimately, by order dated 20.3.1983, writ petitioner was appointed as part-time Tubewell Operator in the Tubewell Section of the Irrigation Department at Sultanpur on a fixed pay of Rs. 200/- per month and thereafter a decision was taken by notification dated 20.2.1992 to pay honorarium at the rate of Rs. 550/- per month. Shri Suresh Chandra Tiwari and others, who were also appointed as part-time Tubewell Operators, filed Writ Petition No. 3558 (S/S) of 1992 (Suresh Chandra Tiwari and others v. State of U.P. and others) before this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State Government to pay to them the regular scale of pay, which was admissible and being paid to the full-time Tubewell Operators and also for quashing the notification dated 20.2.1992 by which honorarium at the rate of Rs. 550/- was fixed.

3. It is relevant here to state that some of the part-time Tubewell Operators approached the Labour Court in regard to the issue of wages and the Labour Court decided that part-time Tubewell Operators shall also be entitled to the regular scale of pay of a Tubewell Operator. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Labour Court, Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, U.P. and others filed Writ Petition No. 1502 (S/S) of 1992 (Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, U.P. and others v. Makrand Singh and others) before this Court. The writ petition filed by Suresh Chandra Tiwari and others, besides the writ petitions of several other part-time Tubewell Operators and the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 1502 (S/S) of 1992 came up for consideration before this Court on 18th March, 1994. The learned Judge by order dated 18th May, 1994, allowed all the writ petitions except Writ Petition No. 1502 (S/S) of 1992 and quashed the notification by which honorarium at the rate of Rs. 550/- per month was fixed and further directed that part-time Tubewell Operators shall be entitled to the same emoluments, i.e. the same scale of pay which other regularly appointed Tubewell Operators are being paid. While doing so, this Court observed as follows :

“What we have found in the earlier part of the judgment, is that the tubewell operators and erstwhile part-time tubewell operators, now called as tubewell assistants perform same nature of duties. It is though provided that duty hours of the tubewell assistants are from 9.30 a.m. to 12 noon, but it is only on paper while in fact they have to work whenever electricity is available during any time of the day and it has also