Both these petitions involve common questions on law and facts and therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. 1. The petitioners of both these petitions have prayed to direct the respondent-Corporation to extend the benefit of higher grade pay-scale to them with effect from 01.06.1987 till they reached the age of superannuation and to pay the difference of salary within a reasonable period.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioners were appointed as Clerks in the respondent-Corporation. Subsequently, they were promoted to the post of Octroi Inspectors and worked as such until they reached the age of superannuation.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that the State Government had introduced a higher grade pay-scale scheme with a view to deal with the issue of stagnation in service of employees who had no opportunity of promotion. The said scheme was also made applicable to the respondent-Corporation. But, the respondent- Corporation did not grant benefits arising out of the said scheme to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petitions have been preferred.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It appears from the record that the scheme under which the petitioners are claiming benefit of higher grade pay- scale requires that the employee concerned should possess a minimum Metric Degree. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners herein do not possess the Metric Degree. Therefore, the respondents were completely justified in denying the benefit of higher grade pay-scale to the petitioners. Apart from that the petitions are also time-barred since they retired in the year 1997 and the captioned petitions came to be filed in the year 2000.
5. In view of the above, I find no merits in the present petitions. Hence, both the petitions are dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*