- (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. The appellant is aggrieved against the brief order dated 1.2.2011, by which the writ petition of the petitioner has been dismissed.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that petitioner approached this Court earlier by filing W.P(S) No.1080/2004, wherein after hearing parties, learned Single Judge held that there was anomaly and directed the State Government to reconsider the matter and fix a uniform pay scale for the Assistants employed in the Forest Department including the petitioner. After the decision dated 19.2.2010 passed in W.P(S) No.1080/2004, the Government took decision on 8.6.2010 and fixed the cutoff date as 1.4.1981 for giving the benefit of the pay scale. The petitioner aggrieved by the Government order dated 8.6.2010 preferred the present writ petition, W.P (S) No.6149/2010, challenging the fixation of the cutoff date as 1.4.1981. It appears from the order impugned dated 1.2.2011 that the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition only on the ground that the Government decided to revise the pay scale of such employees, who were appointed before 1.4.1981. Learned Single Judge has not considered and decided the issue involved in the writ petition, which was with respect to the challenge of fixation of cutoff date as 1.4.1981 by the Government's order dated 8.6.2010. In view of the above reasons, the writ petition has been decided without any speaking order and without deciding the issue involved in the impugned order. The impugned order is liable to be set aside. The impugned order dated 1.2.2011 is set aside and L.P.A is allowed accordingly. The writ petition be heard afresh by the Single Bench.;