As per case facts, petitioners, regularized in 2003, challenged Sections 3 and 4 of the Haryana Act, 2014. This Act retrospectively withdrew "technical pay scale" benefits for those yet to ... receive them, while preserving benefits for employees already granted them, often juniors. This led to seniors receiving lower pay than their juniors for performing identical duties, a situation petitioners argued was discriminatory and against the principle of "equal pay for equal work." The question arose whether the State could validly make such a retrospective distinction, thereby depriving petitioners of their vested rights to upgraded pay scales based merely on the timing of court decisions or departmental processing. Finally, the High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 3 and 4 of the 2014 Act but ruled that these sections apply prospectively to new recruits appointed after December 10, 2013. The Court further held that employees, including the petitioners, who were performing the same duties and had been denied the upgraded "technical pay scales" have a vested right to claim "equal pay for equal work." Their pay must be "stepped up" at par with their juniors from the date of their regularization, with interest for three years prior to filing the writ petitions.