IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.18124 of 2007 Between: C.V.Subba Rao, S/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o.Bramhanna Street, Near Bhavani Hall, Addanki,Prakasam Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Registrar, Management High Court of A.P, Hyderabad 2 The Principle District & Sessions Judge, Ongloe, Prakasam Dist .....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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to set aside the order of the 1st respondent vide of order ROC .No.1311/2006-C-6, dt.13-11-2006 and consequently direct the respondents to ﬁle his pay on par with the petitioner's Junior Sri Y.Sudhakar and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.RAMESH Counsel for the Respondents:SMT.M.BHASKARA LAKSHMI (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.18124 of 2007 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao, J) The petitioner is retired Judicial Ministerial employee. He joined the service in April 1971 as Amin and got promoted as a Junior Assistant in 1972. After completion of ten and ﬁfteen years of service he was given beneﬁt of the scheme of Special Promotion Post (SPP) with a higher pay. In the regular channel he got promotion as Senior Assistant in January 1996 and then Head Clerk in June 2000. He retired from service on 29.02.2004. Just before his retirement he made representation to the second respondent through proper channel requesting to step up his pay on par with his junior Sri Y.Sudhakar, Superintendent in Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Kanigiri. His case is that Sri Sudhakar was junior to him in the post of Junior Assistant, Senior Assistant and Head Clerk, but his pay was ﬁxed at Rs.10,500/-, whereas the petitioner was given Rs.9,900/-. Therefore, he sought the beneﬁt as per G.O.(P).No.75, dated 22.02.1994. Learned District Judge on considering the representation, passed orders on 06.03.2006 rejecting the application, inter alia, concluding that the petitioner is not entitled for stepping up his pay on par with pay of Sri Sudhakar. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted an appeal to the High Court, who were pleased to reject the same by impugned proceedings dated 13.11.2006. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the learned District Judge opposing the writ petition, inter alia, contending that the petitioner is not entitled for the benefit he sought. This Court has heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for High Court. The entire material has been carefully perused. The Government issued orders in G.O.(P).No.75, dated 22.02.1994 with an intention to rectify the anomalies in implementing Automatic Advancement Scheme. The Government ordered that seniors who were on promotion to the next higher post in the regular line on the date on which juniors were appointed to SPP scale – II shall be entitled to SPP scale – II from the date on which juniors were appointed to SPP scale – II and shall be entitled to have their pay ﬁxed from that date in the SPP scale – II in terms of F.R.22(a)(i) read with F.R.31(2). The Government further ordered that even after ﬁxing the pay scale in this manner if the pay of the junior seems to be more than the pay of senior, the pay of senior shall be stepped up to the pay of junior from the date from which the pay of the junior was more. This benefit, however, was made subject to following conditions. a) The senior should have put in 22 years of incremental service (both lower as well as oﬃciating put together) by the date from which the junior was appointed to SPP II scale. b) That both the junior and senior should belong to the same category in the lower post; and that both should have drawn pay in an same time scale, before the senior was promoted. These orders are not applicable to the seniors who are appointed by direct recruitment to higher post. c) That the pay of the junior in the lower category should have been equal or less than to that of his senior prior to the promotion of senior to that of 1st level promotion post. d) The anomaly should have arisen directly as a result of the application of the orders issued in G.O. third read above. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as Amin, whereas Sri Sudhakar was appointed as Lower Division Clerk, and therefore, they do not belong to same category. Secondly, the said Government Order is applicable to the cases, which arose between 01.07.1986 to 31.07.1993. But diﬀerence pointed out by the petitioner arose after 01.07.1996. Taking note of this fact, learned District Judge rightly rejected the request. The High Court after reconsidering the entire issue came to the conclusion that the question of equating petitioner’s pay to that of his junior from the date of promotion of his junior does not arise. The impugned order is, therefore, in accordance with relevant Government Orders. The Writ Petition is misconceived, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) _________________ (G.CHANDRAIAH, J) 30.07.2008 vs To 1 The Registrar, Management High Court of A.P, Hyderabad 2 The Principle District & Sessions Judge, Ongloe, Prakasam Dist 3 2CCs to 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}