HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI WRIT PETITION No.10259 OF 2000 ORDER: In this Writ Petition, petitioner seeks to declare the proceedings of the 1st respondent in ROC No.C1/140/SVIMS/93 dated 29-05-2000 and ROC. No.C1/140/SVIMS/93 dated 03-04-1998, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to regularize her services w.e.f. 29-10-1993 by releasing the regular Annual Grade Increments from that date, with all consequential benefits, including seniority, monetary benefits etc., and to revise the pay as per the revised pay scales 1993 and 1998, respectively. 2. The facts, in brief, are that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondents in Eenadu & Indian Express daily Newspapers calling for applications for the post of Programme Assistant, petitioner applied for the same. Thereafter, petitioner was called for written examination and oral interview held on 22-10-1993 and accordingly, she attended the same and got selected. 1st respondent issued appointment order dated 26-10-1993 to the petitioner stating that she shall join duty before 10-11-1993. Accordingly, she joined duty on 29-10-1993. Thereafter, she made a representation to the 1st respondent to adopt higher scale of pay for the post of Programme Assistant on par with other Universities in the State. By proceedings in ROC.No. C1/79/SVIMS/96, dated 29-05- 1997 respondents merged the posts of P.A. to Unit Heads and Programme Assistants and designated as Steno-cum-Junior Assistant and the pay as in State Government. Through proceedings in ROC.No.C1/140/SVIMS /93, dated 03-04-1998, services of the petitioner were regularized with probationary rights with effect from the forenoon of 30-01-1996. Thereafter, petitioner made another representation to the 1st respondent requesting to regularize her services w.e.f. 29-10-1993 with approved probationary rights w.e.f. 29-10-1995. The 1st respondent vide proceedings in Memo ROC.No. C1/140/SVIMS/93, dated 20-04-2000 rejected the request of the petitioner, stating that her services cannot be revised in terms of G.O.Ms.No.81, dated 05-02-1983. Questioning the same, petitioner preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent on 10-05-2000 and the appellate authority rejected the same though proceedings in ROC. No.C1/140/SVIMS/93, dated 29-05-2000 stating that the appeal is filed under wrong provision of law and that there is a separate enactment i.e. Act No.12/95 for SVIMS, Tirupati and granting temporary increments from the date of her joining till acquiring the requisite qualification of Steno-cum-Junior Assistant and thereafter regular increments were also sanctioned and informing that pay fixation in revised pay scales of 1999 in progress and with regard to leave benefits she will be governed by the A.P. State Government Leave Rules. Contending that except one Annual Grade Increment, which was paid to her during the year 1994, no further Annual Grade Increments are paid to her from 1995 onwards and that the 3rd respondent did not assign any valid reason for rejecting the appeal, petitioner filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and perused the material. 4. Leaned counsel for the petitioner contends that at the time of joining of the petitioner as Programme Assistant, there was no condition of possessing qualification of stenography and that after merging the posts of P.A. to Unit Heads and Programme Assistants and designated as Steno-cum-Junior Assistant, it required the qualification of stenography and that other candidates, who joined along with the petitioner were given the benefit of regularization from the date of their joining and the case of petitioner was rejected on the ground that she did not possess the qualification of stenography when she was initially appointed as Programme Assistant and that her services should be regularized on par with others, whose services were regularized from 1996 onwards. 5. Learned Standing counsel for the respondents opposed the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner and submitted that the petitioner did not possess the qualification of stenography at the time of her initial appointment and, subsequently, at the time that the posts of P.A. to Unit Heads and Programme Assistants were merged and designated as Steno-cum-Junior Assistant, as she did not possess the requisite qualification, her services were regularized after she acquired the requisite qualification and she was also given the pay scale in the cadre of Steno-cum-Junior Assistant with effect from that date. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for both sides and upon perusing the material available on record and in view of the fact that the petitioner acquired the qualification of stenography subsequent to merger of posts of P.A. to Unit Heads and Programme Heads and designate as Steno – cum – Junior Assistants, which requires possessing of qualification of stenography and that her services were regularized after her acquiring requisite qualification and she was also given the pay scale in the cadre of Steno – cum – Junior Assistant with effect from that date, I do not find any reason to interfere with the proceedings impugned. Thus, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J September 30, 2010. KTL