THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD W.P.No.7761 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 25.06.2009 passed in O.A.No.752 of 2005 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent herein was appointed as Lower Division Accountant on 21.08.1970, his services were regularized on 28.12.1973 and he was promoted as Upper Division Accountant on 05.02.1980, whereas one Md. Basheeruddin was appointed as Lower Division Accountant on 01.02.1971, his services were regularized on 22.08.1978 and he was promoted as Upper Division Accountant on 18.02.1986. Alleging that the said Md. Basheeruddin, who was appointed later to his appointment, was drawing more salary than himself, the respondent requested the authorities concerned to re-fix his pay scale and pay the salary as per the revised pay scale. Considering the same, the third petitioner issued proceedings dated 13.09.1989 revising his pay and accordingly, payment was made to him and the same was continued till the date of his retirement i.e., 30.06.2002. When the respondent submitted his pension papers for payment of his retirement benefits, the second petitioner called for the service particulars of the respondent from the third petitioner on 01.05.2002. The first petitioner issued a memo in the year 2002 to the second petitioner for payment of GISF and FBS and interest to the respondent, if not sanctioned. Again, the first petitioner requested the third petitioner to re-examine the pre-ponement and for step up of the pay of the respondent, by his letter, dated 03.01.2003. In compliance of the same, the third petitioner issued proceedings, dated 28.06.2003 cancelling the earlier proceedings, dated 13.09.1989, on the ground that as the units of appointment of the respondent and Md.Basheeruddin were different, pre-poned his increment date to normal date and restored his original time scale as well as increment. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent filed O.A.No.3986 of 2003 before the Tribunal and the same is pending. While the matter stood thus, the first petitioner issued proceedings, dated 18.10.2004 directing the second petitioner for re-fixation of pay and recovery of alleged excess payment of pay scale and allowance from 08.10.1989 to 30.06.2002 from the respondent. Challenging the said proceedings, the respondent filed another O.A.No.752 of 2005 before the Tribunal, which in turn allowed the same. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-II and perused the material on record. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II contended that since the units of appointment of the respondent and Md. Basheeruddin were different, the respondent cannot claim seniority over him and that the preponement and stepping up of pay of the respondent is not in order and therefore, the third petitioner issued proceedings dated 28.06.2003 cancelling the earlier proceedings dated 13.09.1989 and thereafter, the first petitioner issued proceedings dated 18.10.2004, and consequently, his pay was regulated up to the date of retirement vide proceedings dated 07.09.2004. He further contended that the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.201 dated 08.03.1963 made special rules for the Andhra Pradesh Treasury and Accounts Subordinate Service and as per sub-Rule(iii) of Rule 11 of the said Rules, for Branch-III, each office of the Head of the Department concerned shall be the unit for purpose of recruitment, seniority promotion etc., up to and including the posts of Upper Division Accountants and thereafter, the Government made amendment to the said G.O. and issued G.O.Ms.No.203, dated 29.07.1982, constituting the reconstituted Branch-I by merging the erstwhile branches-I and III. 5. Admittedly, the respondent was appointed as Lower Division Accountant on 21.08.1970 in Accounts Branch of Animal Husbandry Department, A.P., Hyderabad and promoted as Upper Division Accountant on 05.02.1980, whereas Md. Basheeruddin was appointed on 01.02.1971 as Lower Division Accountant in Accounts Branch of Government Central Press and promoted to the post of Upper Division Accountant on 18.02.1986. Since the respondent is senior to Md. Basheeruddin, on the request made by the respondent to refix his pay, the third petitioner after considering various G.Os, and circular memos issued by the Government, considered his case and granted pay fixation vide proceedings, dated 13.09.1989 on par with Md. Basheeruddin, but no preponement was sanctioned. In the order impugned, the Tribunal observed that after a lapse of four years after the said fixation and after two years of the retirement of the respondent, the proceedings dated 18.10.2004 were issued by the first petitioner for refixation of the scale of the respondent and for recovery of excess amounts from 08.10.1989 to 30.06.2002, and that the request of the respondent for preponement was not considered by the third petitioner as per the order dated 13.09.1989, and accordingly, set aside the proceedings dated 18.10.2004. The Tribunal further observed that O.A.No.3986 of 2003 filed by the respondent was disposed of, on the very same date of the order impugned. This shows that the Tribunal has considered the matter in proper perspective and rightly passed the order impugned. Therefore, we not find any reason to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date:12.04.2010. sj