Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
T. LAKASHMAIAH & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/04/1997
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy
Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa
Anil Kumar Tandale, Adv. for the appellant
O R D E R
The following order of theCourt was delivered:
This appeal by special leave arises fromthe order of
the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in
R.P. No.767/81, made on June 26, 1985. The Tribunal has
allowedthe representation petition, solely on the ground of
defaulton thepart of the appellantto filethe counter-
affidavit. Therein they had claimed the benefit of graded
increments depending upon the length of service in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.41,Financeand Planning (in Wing.PRC-I) dated
4.2.1980.
The admitted position isthat the respondentswere
workingin thepost ofSenior Assistant Grade-II in the pay
scale of Rs. 200-240/-.They were promoted to Grade-I in the
scale of Rs. 430-800/-. The Government passed an order in
G.O.Ms.No. 235, dated September 7, 1979, effectivefrom
April 1, 1978,granting the revised pay scales. As stated
earlier, G.O.Ms. No. 41, Fin., dated4.2.1980 gives the
benefitas under :
"Weightage for servicein the
existing post or categoryshall be
asfollows in therevisedscale of
pay, 1978.
(i) All employeesin Gr. I to XVII
shall be allowed one increment for
service of three years and above
upto five years, two increments for
service of five years and above
upto seven years,three increments
for service of service seven years
and above."
The question, therefore, is : whether the respondents
are entitled tohave their entire previous service as Trade-
II teacher lagged to count the advance increments in terms
of G.O.Ms. No.41, referred to earlier. Itspecifically
envisages "weightage of service in the existing post or
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
category". It would indicate that the weightage for the
servicerendered in the existing postor category in which
they are working shall be taken intoaccount in terms of
G.O.Ms.No. 41. In other words, if Grade-I teacher remains
in Grade-I service evenafter putting in five years service,
he is entitledto oneincrement; after five to seven years
service, he entitled to two increments; and for service of
seven years andabove, he is entitled to there increments as
outer limit. On his promotionto Grade II from Grade-I in
the scale of Rs. 430-800/-, necessarily on his rendering
servicein that post or category, namely, Grade-I, on his
puttingin service ofthree years tofive years, he is
entitled to oneincrement; for five to seven years’ service,
he is entitledto twoincrements; andfor service of seven
years and above, he is entitled to three increments. He
cannot tag on the previous service in Grade-II for the
purposeof claiming the advance increment in terms of
G.O.Ms.No. 41,dated February 4, 1980.
The appeal, therefore, is allowed. The order of the
Tribunal standsset aside. No costs.