HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27012 OF 2011 ORDER: The 4th respondent is an Educational Institution at Rajahmundry, which is admitted to grant-in-aid. The petitioner states that he joined the service of the 4th respondent in the year 1975 as Pre-vocational Instructor against a clear vacancy. However, his employment in the institution was approved against a post of Attender i.e. last grade service employee and ever since then, he is being paid salary admissible for that post. 2. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Director of School Education, the 2nd respondent, with a prayer to correct the anomaly. The 2nd respondent submitted a proposal to the 1st respondent stating that the petitioner ought to have been placed in minimum time scale for the post of teaching cadre from 01-07-1975. The 1st respondent, however, rejected the proposal, as the petitioner did not hold technical qualifications. The same is challenged in this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Education. 4. The petitioner was appointed in the 4th respondent institution way-back in the year 1975. In case, there existed any anomaly in the pay structure, he ought to have raised the objection immediately. He did not make out any grievance for about three decades. He contends that the Government created facility of extending the pay scale for the post of Teacher in case an employee possessed the qualifications for that post. The petitioner did not possess the qualifications for the post of Craft Teacher. On the other hand, he placed reliance upon the G.O. issued in favour of a candidate by name, B. Venakata Swamy, Craft Teacher, V.T. High School, Rajahmundry way-back in the year 1983. The Government, particularly, in the Education Department is known for its generosity towards a selected few. If the candidate is influential enough, the authorities have gone to any extent of conferring the benefit, even by relaxing, if not, ignoring the Rules. Such a facility cannot, however, be claimed by everyone as of right. 5. The petitioner realized the fact that he did not hold the requisite qualifications. Indirectly, he seeks relaxation of the condition with retrospective effect. Further, the facility created under G.O.Ms.No.727, dated 10-05-1984 appears to be only in respect of training, but not as regards holding of the qualifications. 6. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J September 28, 2011. KTL