THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 14239 of 2010 Dated: 13-7-2010 Between: The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, PR & RD Department, Hyderabad and others. …Petitioners and B. Durga Prasad and another …Respondents ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-II for the petitioners. The writ petition is directed against the order of the learned Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 11-9-2009 in O.A.No. 5585 of 2009 whereby and whereunder the 1st respondent’s petition challenging the Memo dated 6-4-2009 issued by the 3rd petitioner herein (returning the applicant’s proposals for release of increments during the period of his suspension i.e., during 8-5-2006 to 25-6-2007, despite regularisation of the period of suspension) as illegal, was allowed and the petitioners directed to release the increments of the 1st respondent for the period 8-5-2006 to 25-6-2007 and to grant revised pay scales as applicable, within the stipulated period. The applicant was an Assistant Engineer in the Panchayat Raj department. While so he was placed under suspension on 26-4-2006. He was reinstated into service by an order dated 12-6-2007. He was not given the benefit of increments during the period he was under actual suspension, from 8-5-2006 to 25-6-2007 nor the benefit of revised pay scales. He therefore, approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the order impugned and following the judgment of this Court in W.P.No. 6617 of 2004, held that the employee is entitled to incremental benefits even during the period of suspension unless there is proof of unsatisfactory or bad conduct and a formal order withholding increments, is passed. In view of the fact that the order of the Tribunal, impugned herein is based on the earlier judgment of this Court dated 4-11-2004 in W.P.No. 6617 of 2004 against which no challenge is presented in this writ petition, this Court finds no error in the application of law or exercise of discretion by the Tribunal, warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition is without merits and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J 5th July, 2010. GRR