Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri V.K. Singh Somvanshi, Advocate holding brief of Sri R.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for respondents.

2. Claim of petitioner is that working as Assistant Law Officer in the field he is entitled for the same salary and pay scale as applicable to Assistant Law Officers working in Headquarter on the principle of equal pay for equal work. Reliance is placed on Labour Court’s award dated 30.4.1993 passed in Misc. Case No. 41 of 1991 and this Court’s decision in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 36389 of 1995 (Raj Deo Verma v. The U.P. State Sugar Corporation Limited and another), decided on 17.2.2003.

3. However, I find that so far as award of Labour Court is concerned, it is on an application under Section 33-C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1947”) and there is no adjudication of question, whether persons working as Assistant Law Officers in field offices are discharging same duties and entitled for pay scale as applicable to Assistant Law Officers working in Headquarter. In the judgment passed by this Court in Raj Deo Verma (supra) also I do not find t