G.R. Majithia, J.The petitioner has sought a mandate to the respondents to allow her the pay scale of Rs. 170-350 from the date of her appointment as Sewing Mistress and the revised scale of Rs. 570-1,080/- with effect. from January 1, 1978, in this writ petition under Articles 226/2277 of he Constitution of India.

1. The petitioner was appointed as a Sewing Mistress in the grade of Rs. 125-300 vide order No. Estt-77 (E.2) 24188-94, dated May 31, 1977. Respondent No. 1 revised the pay scales of Classical and Vernacular teachers (for short, C & V teachers) from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 170-350/- (for 70% of posts) and selection grade from Rs. 220-400 to Rs. 220-430 (for 30% posts) vide order, dated June 14, 1971. On receipt of the recommendation of the Pay Commission, respondent No. 1 revised the pay scale of C & V teachers to Rs. 570-1,080/- with effect from January 1, 1978. The sewing Mistresses were allowed the revised pay scale of Rs. 480-880/-. Smt. Bakhshish Kaur was appointed as a Sewing Mistress vide order No. Estt-79 (E-I-2)-4397-98, dated August 20, 1979. She was allowed the pay scale of Rs. 170-350/-. The petitioner says that the Sewing Mistress has to be allowed the same scale as allowable to C & V teachers.

2. The respondents in their written statement have taken a plea that the Sewing Mistresses are not borne on the Classical and Vernacular Teachers cadre. They are borne on the State cadre, whereas C & V teachers are borne on district cadre. The pay scale of Sewing Mistresses was revised from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 480-880/with effect from January 1, 1978 and the petitioner has been allowed the revised pay scale. Initially, an affidavit was filed by the District Education Officer, Gurdaspur on behalf of the respondents, dated June 22, 1981 stating that Smt. Bakhshish Kaur was appointed on stop-gap arrangement as Sewing Mistress in C & V cadre in the grade of Rs. 170-350/-. The petitioner was appointed in the grade of Rs. 125-300/- and not in the grade of Rs. 170-350/- and as such, she cannot claim the pay scale allowed to Smt. Bakhshish Kaur.

3. The petitioner was appointed as a Sewing Mistress vide order, dated May 31, 1977 by the District Education Officer, Gurdaspur and she was allowed the pay scale of Rs. 125-300/-. Smt Bakhshish Kaur was appointed as a Sewing Mistress vide order, dated August 20, 1979 and she was allowed the pay scale of Rs. 170-350/-. The Sewing Mistresses similarly situated and possessing the same qualifications have been allowed different pay scales. The explanation rendered by the District Education Officer, Gurdaspur was that Smt. Bakhshish Kaur was appointed as a Sewing Mistress in C & V cadre in the grade of Rs. 170-350/- with a condition that her services were likely to be terminated and as such, her case was on different footing than that of the petitioner. The explanation furnished by the District Education Officer is unsatisfactory and has been graded for the defence in the writ petition. The order of appointment of Smt. Bakhshish Kaur does not say that she has been appointed as a Sewing Mistress in C & V cadre as has now been stated in the affidavit. It is unfortunate that the functionaries of the State Government are treating differently the similarly situated employes.

4. Apart from this, in Amarjit Kaur, Tailoring Mistress, Government High School v. The State of Punjab and others, 1988(4) S.L.R. 199, the learned Single Judge of this Court relying upon a Division Bench decision rendered in Civil Writ Petition No. 1416 of 1981 had held that Sewing Teachresses are entitled to have equality of treatment in matters relating to service including the revised grade of pay. The learned Single Judge had held that the Sewing Teachresses have been allowed the revised scale of Rs. 570-1,080/-. It will be relevant to reproduce the following observations of the learned Single Judge :-

"It has also been impressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that all other colleagues of the petitioner who are still working as Tailoring Mistresses are in the pay scale of Rs. 570-1,080/-. The learned counsel has invoked to his aid a Division Bench judgment of this Court in C.W.P. No. 1416 of 1981 (Smt. Santosh Kumari v. The State of Punjab and others) decided on 25th February, 1982, operative portion whereof is to the following effect :-

"The grievance made is that whereas the pay scale of all other persons holding the same posts have been revised in her case no such revision has been made. The plea raised in the petition has not been controverted. Mr. Sayal appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab States that she was only Middle pass whereas the basic qualification for the said post was Matric. But this fact hardly makes any difference as far as the decision of this case is concerned because once the qualification has been relaxed and the petitioner has been appointed as a Sewing Teachress, she was entitled to have equality of treatment in matters relating to service including the revised grade of pay. We, therefore, allow this petition and direct the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner in the same grade in which the other Sewing Teachresses are drawing their salaries. The salary in the new grade shall be fixed positively within two months from today."

5. I do not find any distinguishing feature in the instant case. I am in complete agreement with the ratio of the judgment in Amarjit Kaurs case.

6. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition succeeds. The respondents are directed to allow the grade of Rs. 170-350/- with effect from May 31, 1977 and the revised pay scale of Rs. 570-1080/- with effect from January 1, 1978 to the petitioner.