THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.240 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Cook in Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swamy Vari Devasthanam, the 3rd respondent, herein, in the year 1965. The post did not have any promotional avenue. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 25.05.1981, providing for Special Adhoc Promotion Scale for such posts, leading to financial benefit, to such employees. Initially, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.15749 of 1989, claiming the benefit under the G.O. The writ petition was disposed of on 25.06.1997, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner. Correspondence ensued thereafter, and not satisfied with the steps taken by the respondents, he filed this Writ Petition, with a prayer to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of pay scale provided for under G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 25.05.1981, with effect from 01.04.1985 and to rectify the anomalies in fixation of the pay scales. The petitioner states that, once the G.O., has provided for incentives, the respondents are not justified in denying the same. A counter-affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent. After referring to the service particulars of the petitioner, it is stated that in stead of extending the benefit of the revised pay scale of Rs.700-1200, his pay scale was fitted into Rs.575-950 and that this anomaly was rectified vide proceedings, dated 09.07.2004. It is further mentioned that the differential amount has been paid to the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. The grievance pointed out by the petitioner was, in fact, noticed by the respondents and remedial steps were taken. The petitioner has filed a calculation memo, depicting the nature of fitment of the scale and the resultant financial benefit he is entitled to. The respondents, on the other hand, enclosed a copy of the proceedings, dated 09.07.2004 indicating the nature of benefit extended to the petitioner, consequent on rectification of the anomaly, in fixation of pay scale. A comparison of both reveals that the grievance of the petitioner has, in fact, been redressed. Therefore, the Writ Petition is closed. It is, however, made clear that, in case any grievance for the petitioner subsists, even after the proceedings, dated 09.07.2004, it shall be open to him to pursue further remedies. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.09.09.2010. GJ