http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: V.GANGARAM

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       25/04/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: Present:               Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy               Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa D. Prakash Reddy and Mrs.D.B. Reddy, Advs. for the appellant T. Anil Kumar, Adv. for the Respondents.                          O R D E R      The following Order of the Court was delivered:      Leave granted.      We have heard learned counsel on both sides.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the order of the Andhra  Pradesh Administrative  Tribunal  at  Hyderabad, made on August 19,1996 in OA No. 2944/93.      The   appellant   was   originally   appointed   as   a Teacher/Head Master in a private aided school on November 9, 1959 in  the scale of Rs.45-120. After his passing secondary Grade Degree  Training Examination  in the year 1967, he was granted on  December 1,1967  SGBT scale  of Rs.80-150 w.e.f. the aforesaid  date. In  view of the fact that the appellant went on  improving his  qualifications for  B.A, M.A., B.Ed. and M.Ed.,  the authorities  went on  giving revision of the pay  scale  granting  advance  increments  as  and  when  he acquired the  qualification on  the pay-scale  applicable at the relevant  time.  Impugned  proceedings  were  issued  to recover the  said amount  paid to him on the premise that he was not  entitled to  the advance  increments more than two. The Tribunal  has dismissed  the petition. Thus, this appeal by special leave.      The Government  in G.O.Ms  No. 928 Education Department (K) dated  September 13,1977  has envisaged the grant of the additional   increment   on   the   minimum   qualifications prescribed for the relevant categories, as indicated below: "(a) One increment for B.A. or equivalent degree. (b) One Increment for B.Ed. (c) One  Increment for  M.A.  or  equivalent  post  Graduate Degree. (d) One Increment for M.Ed."      Admittedly;, he  is  now  having  the  post  of  junior Lecturer  which   requires  the   M.A.  qualification   and, therefore, he is only entitled to two additional increments, namely, for  acquiring his  M.A. and  M.Ed.  qualifications.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

They have stated in the illustration as under: "Sl. Category  Revised  Qualifica-  Additional Qualifi-    No. of No.  of post   scale of tions for   cation for eligibility Advance                pay      the post    to advance Increments  Increments                                                            allowed 1      2        3          4                   5              6 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Trained Graduate     Degree     (a) Post Graduate   One Increment    teachers             and            with B.Ed.    grade II/320-14      Degree     (b) Degree with     One Increment    Schell Asst. 460-15  in                 580     Teaching   (c) post Graduate   Two Increment                          (B.Ed.)       with M.Ed. ----------------------------------------------------------------------      4. The  Additional financial coment      involved to  the management  in the      implementation of these orders will      be  considered  for  assessment  of      teaching grants  due to the schools      under GRANT-IN-AID."      On the basis thereof, the appellant is entitled to only two additional  increments, namely,  one increment  for M.A. and thereafter one for M.Ed.  Under these circumstances, the authorities have wrongly applied the G.O.Ms. 266 Finance and planning dated  November 17,1986.  While issuing the notice, it was  confined to  the question of recovery of the arrears paid to  him from  the year  1985, the  year in  which he is eligible to  acquire additional  qualifications for  holding the post  of Lecturer.  Thus, it  could be  seen that  he is entitled to  the revised  scale of pay giving the additional increments on two qualifications, namely, M.A and M.Ed. and, therefore, he  entitled to  the computation  of the scale of pay the  applicable to  him prior  to the  date of immediate month in which examination was conducted of the scale of pay plus two  additional increments.  He is  not entitled to the four increments, as successively claimed. we hold that he is entitled to the four increments, as successively claimed. We hold that  he is  entitled only two increments, as indicated above.  Since   the  Department  itself  has  adopted  above approach, we  direct that arrears paid prior to 1985 are not to be  recovered and excess amount from 1985 is liable to be recovered  from   the  pension  payable  to  the  appellant. Instalment should  be proportionately  distributed so as not to cause any undue hardship.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.