- (1.) THE present interlocutory application has been filed seeking amendment in the writ petition.
(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that, during the pendency of the writ petition order dated 19.01.2012 has been passed which has initiated filing of the present amendment application. By the impugned order dated 19.01.2012, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that at the relevant time, the requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Headmistress was Post -Graduate Trained and since, the petitioner was not possessing the said qualification, she is not entitled for the pay -scale as claimed by her. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that, the foundational facts of the case have already been stated by the petitioner in the writ petition and the statements made in the amendment application are only clarifying and supplementing the writ petition therefore, it would not change the nature of the case.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents opposes the prayer for amendment in the writ petition. I am of the view that, since the petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction for fixation of her pay -scale, a decision in regard to which has been finally taken by the order dated 19.01.2012, the present application seeking amendment in the writ petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly, I.A. No. 1231 of 2012 is allowed. W.P.(S) No. 5243 of 2011;