JUDGMENT :

(Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging order dated 15.7.2019 passed by respondent no.2-Director, Horticulture and Food Processing, Lucknow whereby his representation for minimum of pay scale is rejected.

3. Facts of the case, as claimed by petitioner, are that petitioner was engaged as a daily wager on Class-IV post (Mali) in the year 2013 in the office of Scientist, State Tissue Culture Lab, Sector-G, Aliganj, Lucknow, where he was being paid daily wages only. He claims that other similarly situated daily wage employees, who have completed more than five years of service, are being paid minimum of pay scale while the same is denied to him.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that impugned order is passed on false and incorrect facts. Submissions made by petitioner are either not considered in the impugned order or are rejected by concocting incorrect facts.

5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel strongly opposing the petition, submits that since petitioner is working as a daily wager through a service provider agency, hence, he