HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.47 of 2004 ORDER: Petitioners are working as Lecturers in a Private Aided Educational Institution, by name, S.R.V.B.S.J.B.Maharani College, Peddapuram, East Godavari District, 4th respondent herein, and the said College was admitted to grant-in-aid. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents 1 to 3 are not counting the service rendered by them before their appointment against the aided vacancy was approved. Petitioners contend that the service rendered by them before they were appointed against the aided vacancy is necessary to enable them to get the benefit under the Career Advancement Scheme (for short ‘CAS’). They seek directions in this regard. 2. Respondents filed counter affidavit together with annexures. According to them, the petitioners are entitled to count the service after they have been approved against the aided vacancy. Reference is made to various Government Orders issued from time to time and Act 9 of 2000. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education. 4. The CAS is introduced under the guidelines framed by the University Grants Commission. According to this, a lecturer, who has put in a particular length of service, shall be entitled to be placed in a higher scale of pay and such benefit would be individual. The Government of Andhra Pradesh adopted that scheme for the Lectures in the Government Colleges and later on, it was extended to the Lecturers in the Private Aided Educational Institutions also. It is common that Lecturers or Teachers are appointed, initially, against the unaided vacancies in the Private Institutions, by the Management. It is only over a period of time that they are absorbed or appointed against the aided vacancies. Controversy persisted as to whether the services rendered against unaided vacancies can be treated as holding good for the purpose of pension or other benefits. The Government issued orders from time to time such as G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 12-2-1998, clarifying that it is only the service rendered after a Teacher is appointed against an aided vacancy, that can be taken into account. Clarifications were also issued to the contrary; and the uncertainty remained. 5. The Legislature stepped in and enacted Act 9 of 2000. It has a very long preamble and only two sections are crucial, viz., Sections 2 and 3. Section 2 mandates that only the service rendered after appointment of an individual is admitted to grant-in-aid, can be counted. Section 3 covers in negative terms, viz., that no employee shall be entitled to count the service rendered by him before he was absorbed or appointed against an aided vacancy. Petitioners have not chosen to challenge those provisions. The matter as on the date of filing of the writ petition is only the services rendered against the aided posts that can be counted for CAS and other benefits. Therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that in case, there exist any provisions of law, which are in favour of the petitioners, they shall be entitled to pursue the remedies in accordance the same. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J November 11, 2010. KTL