IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 22322 of 2008 Between: 1 Union of India, through its Secretary, M/o. Information & Broadcasting, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. 2 The Chief Executive Engineer, Prasara Bharathi, Prasara Bharathi Secretariat, 2nd Floor, PTI Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi - 110 001. 3 The Director General, All India Radio, Akashavani Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. 4 The Director General, Doordarshan, Doordarshan Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. 5 The Station Director , All India Radio, Hyderabad. 6 The Station Director , All India Radio, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 7 The Station Director , All India Radio, Markapuram, Prakasam District. 8 The Station Director , All India Radio, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 9 The Station Director , All India Radio, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 10 The Station Director , All India Radio, Ananthapuram, Ananthapuram District. 11 The Station Director , All India Radio, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 12 The Station Director , All India Radio, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 13 The Station Director , All India Radio, Kurnool, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 K.L. Srinivasa Reddy S/o.Rami Reddy Plot No.135, Osmania University Colony, Shaikpet, Hyderabad. 2 A.Lakshmana Kumar S/o.Venkata Satyanarayana Rao Plot No.408, Mourya Towers, Vidya Nagar, Hyderabad. 3 K.Kameshwari C/o.KVR Murthy, No.3/4/705/3, 4 Plot No. 408, RVD Apartments, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. 4 Aruna Kumari W/o.Picheswara Rao No.D-1, AIR Quarters, Punnamathota, Vijayawada. 5 N.Sudhakara Rao S/o.N.Seshagiri Rao No.C-2, AIR Staff Quarters, Markapuram. 6 A.Sampath Naidu S/o.Chenchu Naidu No.2/45, Chaitanyapuri Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. 7 V.Gopichand S/o.Venkateshwarlu Flat No.401, Sunanda Apartments, Vikaspuri ESI to Gi Colony, Hyderabad. 8 D.Murali S/o.D.Venkata Ramana No.B-3, AIR Staff Quarters, Anantapur. 9 Dr.Y.Srinivasulu S/o.Lakshmanna No.B-3, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 10 Paul Rajashekar S/o.M.Krupa Rao No.D-2, AIR Quarters, Nizamabad. 11 N.Vijaya Raghava Reddy S/o.Chenna Reddy H.No.3-39, 1B, Vaikuntapuram, Marapally, Tirupati. 12 Ch. Mahesh S/o.Ramana Murthy No.15/82, Prabhu Nagar, Poranki, Vijayawada. 13 K.Ramana Swamy S/o.Late P.K. Swamy No.B-11, AIR Colony, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. 14 K.Venkateshwara Rao S/o.K.V. Saradhy AIR, Visakhapatnam. 15 A.Vijaya Bhaskara Swamy S/o.A.Pulla Reddy H.No.1-436/2A(1), Maruthinagar, Cuddapah. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order dt. 31.12.2007 in O.A. 619 of 2007 in the ﬁle of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary against the principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.22322 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Union of India ﬁled this writ petition challenging the order dated 31-12-2007 passed in O.A.No.619 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, by virtue of which the petitioners have been directed to pay the applicants the pay and allowances attached to the post of Programme Executive from the date of their ad hoc appointment in that post. 2. The respondents ﬁled the above O.A. seeking the pay scale attached to the post of Programme Executive (PEX) from the date of their oﬃciating in the post with all consequential beneﬁts. The case of respondents is that they have been promoted as Programme Executives on ad hoc basis for a period of one year and subsequently, reverted to their respective substantive posts and that they have been again ordered to hold the charge of Programme Executive, but without any ﬁnancial beneﬁt attached to that post. The petitioners contested the OP contending that the respondents, if not willing, can discharge the duties in the substantive post and there is no compulsion to hold the charge of Programme Executive. The Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions and relying upon the decisions of the C.A.T., Ranchi Bench and Bangalore Bench on similar issue, held that the respondents are entitled to pay and allowances applicable to the post of Programme Executive. Aggrieved thereby, Union of India preferred this writ petition. 3. Heard learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record. 4. Learned Assistant Solicitor General contended that the respondents – employees on their own volition have accepted and joined the promotion post and agreed that they will not claim any emoluments applicable to the post of Programme Executive and as such, they are not entitled to such benefit. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has drawn our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in SECRETARY-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, CHANDIGARH Vs. HARI OM SHARMA[1] and contended that an undertaking from an employee that he would not claim salary of a higher post or any other benefit, is illegal and arbitrary. 5. We have considered the contentions advanced on either side. Admittedly, the respondents were holding the substantive post of Transmission Executives and they have been promoted as Programme Executives and discharging the duties in the promoted post. Further, an order of reversion was issued, but they were again asked to hold the charge of Programme Executives. When the respondents had been discharging the duties of Programme Executives and taking up the risks and responsibilities of that post, they have to be given pay and allowances applicable to that post, but not otherwise. The Tribunal relied upon the view taken by the C.A.T., Ranchi and Bangalore Benches in O.A.No.141 of 2005 by order dated 15-01-2006 and O.S.No.144 of 2006, vide order dated 07-11-2006, respectively, that the respondents cannot be asked to perform the duties of Programme Executive, without giving them the beneﬁt of pay scale attached to that post. An undertaking obtained from an employee that he would not claim salary of the higher post or any other beneﬁt is held to be illegal as held by the above-referred decision of the Supreme Court. It is not disputed that the view taken by the CAT had attained ﬁnality. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of certiorari jurisdiction. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. _________________________ G.CHANDRAIAH, J. 20-10-2008 bsc [1] 1998 SCC (L & S) 1273