- (1.) Grievance has been made in this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution 1 that the lady teachers and other female employees in the educational line doing administrative business in employment of the Statf, of Uttar Pradesh are being discriminated against inasmuch as while they are called upon to do the same work as their counterparts (male teachers and officials), they are paid a lower scale of salary and avenues of promotion are not open to them in the same proportion as available to the male teachers and employees. Notice on this petition had been given on 24-1-1986 which is more than four and a half years back. The State of Uttar Pradesh though given sufficient opportunity to place its case through an appropriate affidavit has chosen not to do so. A counter affidavit was filed in June, 1986 which was not considered adequate when the matter was taken up for hearing. On April 29, 1991, we had made following order : "Mrs. Dixit has undertaken to file a detailed further affidavit by 15th July, 1991 specifying the position relating to meet the allegations in the Writ Petition as on 30th June, 199l."
(2.) When this matter is called today, which is more than three weeks after the outer date indicated for filing of the counter-affidavit, a prayer for adjourning the matter for six more weeks is made to comply with what was directed in the previous order. Mrs. Dixit says that an application has been filed for this extension.
(3.) We have considered all aspects and see no justification to adjourn the matter any longer. The Court's orders are intended to be complied with from time to time by parties before it and when the matter is listed it is intended to be taken up for disposal. We are not prepared to accept the stand of Mrs. Dixit that as there has been an intervening election to the State legislature and change of Government, governmental business has been disrupted. The prayer for adjournment is rejected.;