canvassed are brought through two decisions of the Supreme Court for each one of the issues raised. In U.P. Rajya Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd., U.P. Vs. Its Workmen AIR 1990 SC 495 , the three Bench of the Supreme Court was considering an instance of higher wages to one group of promotees from a particular back date while the promotees of another group were denied such a benefit if they were promoted after a particular date. That is precisely the incident that happened in this case by providing to persons higher scales of ` 3700-5700, while denying to persons who had been promoted subsequently that benefit. There was literally no basis for such a discrimination. In yet another decision in Jaipal Vs. State of Haryana AIR 1988 SC 1504, the Supreme Court was considering the mode of recruitment of Instructors as either recruits in the open market or promotees as a justification for applying different scales was found to be bad and violative of the principles of equal pay for equal work. This in this case is the second point which we have examined just now. The two decisions of the Supreme Court find echoes elsewhere from the other Courts as well. In the decision in Dr. R.R. Gupta and others Vs. State of Rajasthan 1989 (6) SLR 478 , a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court was actually considering a very same notification issued by the Government and held it to be bad in law. A Division Bench by Andhra Pradesh has also examined the revised scales brought through the notification in the decision in Osmania University Teachers Association Vs. State of A.P., Education Department 2002(2) SCT 271
