Devendra Kumar Arora, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for parties and perused the record.
(2.) WITH the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, I proceed to hear the matter finally. Learned Counsel for petitioners submits that the controversy involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court at Allahabad in Writ Petition No. 10665 of 2006 and Anr. connected Writ Petition No. 13347 of 2006, decided on 30.3.2009, whereby this Court at Allahabad while allowing both the writ petitions, set aside the impugned order and directed that petitioners must be paid the same pay -scale as is being paid to the teachers of schools. It was also provided that in accordance with the above authority of the Supreme Court, the pay -scale shall be granted to the petitioners since the date of filing of the earlier writ petition i.e. Writ Petition No. 49384 of 2004, decided on 22.11.2004. Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid facts.
(3.) IN view of the above, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment and order dated 30.3.2009, passed in Writ Petition No. 10665 of 2006 and in Writ Petition No. 13347 of 2006 and the benefit of the Judgment & order dated 30.3.2009 shall also be extended to the petitioners of the instant writ petition.;