ARATI PATI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE opposite party No,4 is deleted from the array of the parties. Petitioner is directed to correct the designation of opposite party No.2 during the course of the day.

(2.) HEARD Mr. S.C. Acharya, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education Department.

(3.) THE petitioner is still in service. She had demanded to get arrears of differential salary. In fact, she has got salary regularly, but the differential amount of salary according to the revised pay scale was not given to her. We do not agree with the opinion of the Tribunal that the petitioner would be entitled to get only the dues of past three years from the date of filing of the O.A. During the period of service, the petitioner would be entitled to get her dues and, for this no limitation would be applicable.