A
B
DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
v.
T. LEKSHMAIAH AND ORS.
APRIL 2, 1997
(K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.)
Se1vice Law-Advance increment-Entitlement to-G.O.Ms No. 41
dated 4.2.1980-Expression Weightage for se1vice in the existing post or
categ01y-Inte1pretation of-Respondents working in grade II- Subsequently
C promoted to grade-I-Question whether entire previous se1vice can be counted
for the purpose of advance increments-Held previous se1vice in Grade-II
cannot be tagged for the pwpose of claiming the advance increments in temis
of G.O.Ms. No. 41 dated Febmary 4, 1980.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1671 of
D 1986.
E
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.6.95 of the Andhra Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in R.P. No. 767 of 1981.
Anil Kumar Tandale for the Appellant.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Andhra
Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in R.P. No. 767/81, made on
p
June 26, 1985. Tribunal has allowed the representation petition, solely on
the ground of default on the part of the appellant to file the counter-af-
fidavit. Therein they had claimed the benefit of graded increments depend-
ing upon the length of service in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 41, Finance and
planning (in Wing. PRC-I) dated 4.2.1980.
G
The admitted position is that the respondents were working in the
post of Senior 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, effective
from April 1, 1978, granting the revised pay scales. As stated earlier, G.O.
H Ms. No. 41, Fin., dated 4.2.1980 gives the benefit as under :
526
DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDN. v. T. LAKSHMAIAH
527
"Weightage for service in the existing post or category shall be as A
follows in the revised scale of pay, 1978.
(i) All employees in 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 incre-
ments for service of service seven years and above."
B
The question, therefore, is: whether the respondents are entitled to
have their entire previous service as Trade-II teachers a tagged to count
the advance increments in terms of G.O.Ms. No.41, referred to earlier. It
specifically envisages "weightage for service in the existing post or C
category". It would indicate that the weightage for the service rendered in
the existing post or category in which they are working shall be taken into
account in terms of G.O.Ms.No.41, In other words, if Grade-I teacher
remains in Grade-I service even after putting in five years' service, he is
entitled to one increment,' after five to seven years; service, he is entitled
to two increments, and for service of seven years and above, he is entitled D
to three increments as outer limit. on his promotion to Grade II from
Grade-I in scale of Rs.430-800/-, necessarily on his rendering service in that
post or category, namely, Grade-I, on his putting in service of three years
to five years 'service, he is entitled to one increment, for five to seven years'
service, he is entitled to two increments, and for service of seven years and E
above, he is entitled to three increments. He cannot tag on the previous
service in Grade-II for the purpose of claiming the advance increments in
terms of G.O.Ms, No.41, dated February 4, 1980.
The appeal, therefore, is allowed, The order of the Tribunal stands
set aside. No costs.
T.N.A.
Appeal allowed.
F
Lex