Judicially settled pay scale benefits must be extended to all similarly situated employees to ensure parity.

Twenty-one applicants, appointed as Technician-III in 1998 following Advertisement Notice No. 60 of 1997, filed this original application seeking a pay scale upgrade

They were initially appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1500 (revised to Rs. 3050-4910)

The applicants contend that as ITI certificate holders with Matriculation, they fall under Category-A of Schedule-C of SRO 149 of 1973

They allege that while departmental promotees and junior employees have been granted the higher pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000, the applicants—who perform identical duties—have been denied the same, despite the scale being revised under the JK Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1998

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 at par with Technician-III promotees and in accordance with SRO 149 of 1973

2. Whether the respondents adopted a "pick and choose" method in granting pay scales, thereby violating the seniority of the applicants

The court referred to the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules of 1973 (SRO 149), 1982 (SRO 91), 1987 (SRO 317), and 1998

It relied on the principle of parity as established by the JK High Court in SWP No. 60 of 1990 and SWP No. 809/2001 (dated 08.05.2017), which directed the payment of the Rs. 5000-8000 scale to similarly situated technical employees

The court further noted the dismissal of the respondents' appeal against these findings by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 7992/2022 on 04.02.2026

The Tribunal did not adjudicate upon the merits of the applicants' claims but focused on the administrative duty of the respondents to ensure uniform application of the law

The Tribunal reasoned that if the applicants are "squarely covered" by the cited law and judicial pronouncements, and if there are no legal impediments, the respondents are obligated to accord them similar benefits to ensure justice and maintain parity among similarly situated employees

The respondents were ordered to consider and decide the representation in light of the applicants' eligibility and the relevant judicial precedents within eight weeks via a speaking and reasoned order