- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. In all above writ petitions, common dispute is involved, therefore, all the above writ petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) ACCORDING to the facts of the case, the petitioners of all the above writ petitions were provided appointment in pursuance of advertisement No.201/2004-05 (Annexure-1). In the advertisement, following condition No.4 was incorporated, which reads as under :- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners accepted appointment upon above condition No.4, therefore, the respondents are abide by the judgment rendered by this Court in case of Shankar Lal & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. in which directions were issued by this Court to grant regular pay-scale while taking into consideration para No.4 of the advertisement (Annex.1). The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that contrary to the above condition No.4 of advertisement Annexure-1, the impugned order has been passed by the respondents whereby after negotiation the salary of the petitioners has been fixed as Rs.6100/-only whereas the petitioners' are entitled for regular pay-scale with all admissible allowances in view of para-4 of the advertisement under which they were selected and appointed, therefore, the order impugned may be quashed and the respondents may be directed to grant all the benefits as per para 4 of the advertisement under which the petitioners were provided appointment.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that after regularization by the Committee in pursuance of new Regulation, 2010 formulated by Corporation, the petitioners are entitled to get fixed wages at the rate of Rs.6100/- only, the order impugned issued under new regulations of 2010 is justified, therefore, this writ petition may be dismissed.;