IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No : 16091 of 2000 BETWEEN: M.Sankar Reddy, S/o.M.Baya Reddy, A.P.S.R.T.C., Madanapalli II Depot, Madanapalli, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Madanapalli II Depot, Madanapalli. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the orders issued by the 2nd Respondent in proceedings No.E.5/785(1)/2000-RM(TPT), dt:31.3.2000 and further proceedings No.I.R.II/264(9)-54(IR), dt:14.9.1992 directing to withdrawn the Graduation increments sanctioned to the Graduate Conductors who are appointed by transfer as Junior Clerks-now re-designated as Junior Assistant and working in Madanapalli Ii Depot is illegal, unjust, contrary to law, violation of principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and with out jurisdiction and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.M.VENKATA RAMANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents : SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI The Court made the following : ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings No. I.R.II/264(9)-54(IR), dated 14.09.1992 and Proceedings No.E.5/785 (1)/2000-RM(TPT), dated 31st March 2000, whereby the graduation increment sanctioned to the petitioner, was withdrawn, and he seeks directions against the respondents for payment of graduation increment after his appointment as a Junior Assistant in recruitment by transfer. 2. The petitioner has joined in the service of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation as a Conductor on 16th of May 1985 and his services were regularized in the said post with effect from 1st August 1986. Since then, he was being continued in the post of Conductor. Apart from the scale attached to the post of Conductor, the petitioner was also extended the benefit of one increment on account of his attaining the qualification of graduation. The said increment was extended in terms of circular instructions, to encourage the non-graduate Conductors to acquire the qualification of graduation. However, when the recruitment has taken place to the post of Junior Assistant, the petitioner has also applied as an in-service candidate. He got selected and was appointed as a Junior Assistant with effect from 11th February 1987. Initially, he filed a writ petition in this Court in writ petition No.26357 of 1998, seeking regularisation from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 16th May 1985. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court by an order dated 10th August 2000. Thereafter, through Proceedings No.E.5/785(1)/2000-RM (TPT), dated 31st March 2000, the petitioner was informed that in view of dismissal of the said writ petition, his claim for grant of graduation increment will not be considered. 3. Precisely, it is the case of the petitioner that as his pay included the increment on account of his possessing the qualification of graduation, and as he was appointed in the higher post of Junior Assistant in the recruitment by transfer as a departmental candidate, he was entitled for continuation of such benefit in terms of provision contained under Regulation 7A(e) of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Service) Regulations, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Service Regulations’), framed under Section 45 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. 4. Counter affidavit is filed by the Law Officer of the respondent-Corporation. While generally denying various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated in the counter affidavit that the increment of Rs.45/-, which was paid to the petitioner on account of possessing graduation qualification, was treated as personal pay and the petitioner is not entitled for continuation of such increment after his appointment as a Junior Assistant. In this case, it is to be noted that in the APSRTC Employees’ (Recruitment) Regulations, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Recruitment Regulations’), the qualifications and eligibility criteria for different posts are notified, as per which, for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant, graduation is a minimum qualification. Though the petitioner was paid the graduation increment when he was holding the post of Conductor, for which post graduation was not required, but however, when he was appointed as a Junior Assistant, for which, graduation was minimum qualification, the petitioner is not entitled for continuation of such increment. It is to be noted that as per Regulation 7A(e) of the Service Regulations, there is pay protection for the in-service candidates who were appointed to the other post, but the said provision is confined to the pay which was being drawn, but not to the personal pay which was being paid by way of increment on account of possessing graduation. Even after appointment to the post for which minimum qualification is graduation, petitioner cannot seek continuation of increment given for possessing graduation. So far as personal pay is concerned, which was being paid to the petitioner when he was holding the post of Conductor, the same cannot come under pay protection as contemplated under Regulation 7A(e) of the Service Regulations. However, it appears that even after his promotion, for certain period, the said benefit of personal pay was extended to the petitioner. As much as there was no misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the petitioner in getting such personal pay, whatever amounts are paid to him, shall not be recovered from him. 5. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st December 2008 ajr