That writ petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to give full benefit of Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee Rules by fixing the pay and allowances of the petitioners and other similarly situated employees in the pay scales specified in the Schedule appended to the Rules or at par with the Central Government employees holding equivalent posts.
267 of 2008 whereby they had claimed that they were entitled to pay and allowances and other benefits under Rule 6 quoted hereinabove.
They have been rendering service uninterruptedly as employees of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee and numberdistinction can be made between the service prior to 03.07.2000 and the service rendered thereafter.
They were also directed to pay arrears from the date of promulgation of the Rules i.e. 03.07.2000.
The services of the officers and employees were governed by Rule 3A and after 2000, they are governed by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee Regulations, 2000.
Therefore, the posts were sanctioned posts though numberrules were framed for filling up the same.
Pursuant to these instructions, the petitioners were appointed in different capacities in the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee.
Thereafter, the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 came into force.
The Union of India has raised a twofold submission.
