Gabriel Saver Fernandes and Ors. v. the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Leave granted. It is contend~d for the appellants that as per the directions, issued by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 1173/62, dated March 4, 1965, the D High Court had struct down the rules holding that there c~ot be any distinction between the Talatis and Village Accountants. They cannot be clubbed together and they constitute different eategories and that, there­ fore, they are entitled to separate scales of pay. When they claimed the scale of pay on the basis of revised pay scales at Rs. 90-200 instead of Rs. E 80-145, the Tribunal l;tas committed illegality in not considering the distinc­ tion and that therefore, the ~ppellants are not entitled to the benefit of the payment of scale of pay of Rs. 90-200 as per 1970 Rules w.el. January 1, 1970. It would appear that the Government made a distinction between Talatis and Village Accountants. who possessed SSLC qualification and those who are non-SSLC candidates. For the candidates who are having SSLC qualification, pay scale of Rs. 90-200 has been provided for. Admit­ tedly, the appellants are not in that category as they are non-SSLC can- . I · didates. The Government, therefore, thought it expedient to make a G distinction between qualified and unqualified persons and prescribed dif­ ferent scales of pay. Hence, we do not find any invidious discriinination made between the two categories to club together and grant them same scale of pay of Rs. 90-200. However, since the appellants have already been paid the scale of pay of Rs. 90-200 while they were in service and are H retired now, it would be appropriate that the Government may not recover G.S. FERNANDES v. STATE OFKARNATAKA 107 , from them the salary which they had already received though they are not A · eligible to the scale of pay of Rs. 90-200. · The appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs. G.N. Appeals dismissed.