- (1.) The appellants before us were employed in the establishment of the first respondent as Anganwadi training principal and Anganwadi training instructors. The first appellant worked from 23/5/1983 to 14/8/1995, appellant no. 2 from 7/1/1989 to 17/1/1996, appellant no. 3 from 5/11/1987 to 5/10/1997 and appellant no. 4 from 23/5/1987 to 1/12/1997.
(2.) They laid claim in a writ petition before the High Court that they are entitled to same pay and allowances of postgraduate teachers under the central government and Delhi administration on the basis that they were performing similar duties and functions.
(3.) The High Court, however, dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the anganwadi is not an instrumentality of the state and it cannot be equated with the central government and it is for the central government to take an appropriate decision whether the benefit of the fourth central pay commission should be made applicable to them or not.;