IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25605 of 2007 Between: 1 The District Educational Officer, Adilabad 2 The Commissioner & Director of School Education AP., Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND P.Linga Rao, Retd.SA, ZPSS Kerameri, Adilabad District H.No.9-4- 105, Srinagar colony, Karimnagar, karimnagar distri .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with order 7.8.2006 in OA.No. 9795/2001 on the file of the Hon`ble APAT., Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same by holding as erroneous and contrary to law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.CH.JAGANNADHA RAO The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition is filed in the nature of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records in O.A.No. 9795 of 2001 dated 7.8.2006 on the file of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to declare the same as erroneous and contrary to law. O.A.No. 9795 of 2001 was filed by the respondent herein under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying the Tribunal as under: (a) To quash proceedings No. A1/6720/97, dated 4.6.1998, of the 1st respdnent; (b) Consequently, declare that the applicant is entitled for stepping up of his pay, on par with his juniors, by allowing the Selection Grade Scale of Pay under F.R.27 and in terms of various Circulars and Memos issued by the Government, with all consequential benefits; and (c) For such other and further reliefs, as the Tribunal deems fit and necessary etc” The respondents in the O.A did not choose to file counter. The Tribunal disposed of the O.A granting the following reliefs to the applicant: “(I) Grant both the reliefs claimed by the applicant and set forth in sub-paras (a) and (b) of Para-I, supra; (II) Direct the concerned respondents 1 and 2, to give effect to the relief granted by sub-para (I), supra, in so far as the same pertain to the relief covered by sub-para (b) of Para-I, supra, without fail, at the earliest, and in any case, within a period of not later than 60 days, after receipt of a copy of the present Orders, and later, shall communicate the same, to the applicant, within one week, thereafter, in writing, under his proper written acknowledgement, under his signature, and giving no scope, or , room, to the applicant, who is a retired employee, to again approach this Tribunal, in respect of non-compliance therewith, by either of the respondents.” Being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the respondents in the O.A have filed this Writ Petition. The learned Government Pleader contended that the Tribunal has not examined the matter in detail but it has followed the orders of the Tribunal made in O.A.No. 5182 of 1992 instead of O.A No. 5128 of 1992 due to the typing mistake of the number of the earlier O.A filed by T. Satyanarayana and allowed the claim of the applicant on the ground that the applicant fulfilled the criterion laid down in G.O.Ms.No. 632, Education Department dated 14.3.1966. In the said G.O., the Government directed as under: (i) With effect from 1.4.1966 Secondary Grade Trained Teachers who have reached the maximum of their pay scale of Rs. 80-150 and have been stagnating at the maximum for the last five years or more should be allowed to enter into the extended scale of pay of Rs. 150-180 with an annual increment of Rs. 7 ½ ; and (ii) There after i.e., with effect from 1.4.67 5% of the total number of teachers who reached the maximum should be allowed to enter the aforementioned extended scale progressively every year without the stipulation of five years stagnation subject to a maximum of 25% including the first batch of promotees referred to in item (i) above.” The learned Government Pleader further contended that the Tribunal set aside the impugned order dated 4.6.1998 and proceeded to examine the matter with reference to O.A.No. 5182 of 1992, instead of proceeding with to examine the matter with reference to O.A.No. 5128 of 1992. We have perused the order impugned. As seen from the orders, the Tribunal while considering the issue observed that O.A.No. 5182 of 1992 relied upon by the first respondent therein, is different, distinct and has no bearing in respect of stepping up of pay claimed by the applicant on par with T. Satyanarayana. The Tribunal rendered judgment following the judgment in O.A.No. 5182 of 1992 instead of following the judgment rendered in O.A.No. 5128 of 1992. Hence, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal of the matter in accordance with law and on considering the judgment rendered in O.A.No. 5128 of 1992 dated 14.7.1994, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt. 24.11.2008 KA Note: Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Registrar, Andrha Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2CD copies