Ramaswamy, K.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THE appellant was appointed on 29/7/1972 as a Librarian in government ollege in the pay scale of Rs. 220-550. The Haryana government accepting the ecommendations of the government of India and the University Grants omission upgraded the pay scales of librarians with effect from 1-1-1973 to s 700-1600, if they possessed a minimum educational qualification of first or second class M. A. , M. Sc. , M. Com. plus a first or second class B. Lib. Science or Diploma in Library Science, the degree of M. Lib. Science being a preferential qualification. Thereafter taking into consideration, representations made by ever all librarians appointed prior to 31/12/1972 and the recommendations of he University Grants Commission, the government of India in its proceedings f 16/1/1987 relaxed the requirement of securing first or second class in M. A". Sc. , M. Com. and other prescribed educational qualifications, by an order hich was in the following terms:

"it has now been decided, on the recommendation of the UGC, that the existing incumbents of the posts of Librarians in colleges who have been appointed to these posts on or before 3/12/1972 may be sanctioned the upgraded scale of Rs. 700-1600 in relaxation of the qualification prescribed in Annexure-I referred to above without insisting on a first or second class in the degree, diploma or other prescribed educational qualification. "

( 3 ) THE Principal of the College, where the appellant was working as a Librarian allowed him the revised pay scale of Rs. 700-1600 purporting to act under the above order. However, the government of Haryana directed the Principal to withdraw the pay scale of Rs. 700-1600 allowed to the appellant. The appellant had challenged their direction in CWP No. 10988 of 1993 in the High court of Punjab and Haryana. The High court by the impugned order dated 9/9/1993 dismissed the writ petition. Thus this appeal by special leave.

( 4 ) MR Prem Malhotra, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the previous scale of Rs. 220-550 to which the appellant was entitled became Rs. 700-1600 since the appellant had been granted that scale of pay in relaxation of the educational qualification. The High court was, therefore, not right in dismissing the writ petition. We do not find any force in this contention. It is seen that the government in consultation with the University Grants Commission had revised the pay scale of a Librarian working in the colleges to Rs. 700-1600 but they insisted upon the minimum educational qualification of first or second class M. A. , M. Sc. , M. Com. plus a first or second class B. Lib. Science or a Diploma in Library Science. The relaxation given was only as regards obtaining first or second class in the prescribed educational qualification but not relaxation in the educational qualification itself.

( 5 ) ADMITTEDLY the appellant does not possess the required educational qualifications. Under the circumstances the appellant would not be entitled to the relaxation. The Principal erred in granting him the relaxation. Since the date of relaxation the appellant had been paid his salary on the revised scale. However, it is not on account of any misrepresentation made by the appellant that the benefit of the higher pay scale was given to him but by wrong construction made by the Principal for which the appellant cannot be held to be at fault. Under the circumstances the amount paid till date may not be recovered from the appellant. The principle of equal pay for equal work would not apply to the scales prescribed by the University Grants Commission.

(6).The appeal is allowed partly without any order as to costs.