1 APHC010430872012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 35828/2012 Between: B.chinna Gopal, S/o. B.pullaiah, ...PETITIONER AND The Andhra Pradesh Residential Educational and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 2. K DURGA PRASAD The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to .issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1g respondent rejecting the case of the petitioner vide proceedings Rc No 4331/A32/2012 dated 16.05.2012 for stepping up of pay scale on par with his juniors as illegal arbitrary and violative Art 14 of Constitution of India and direct the 1St respondent to grant pay scale on par with his juniors giving effect from on 16 01 1989 and pass….” 2 2. . The grievance of the petitioner is he was appointed as Watchman on 18.11.1983 on contingent basis. One G. Mohan Murali and Smt. B.Ayamma were also appointed on 19.11.1983 and 21.11.1983 as a Sweeper and Helper respectively on contingent basis. The respondents have regularized the services of the said G.Mohan Murali and Smt. B.Ayyamma on 16.10.1989 and 14.2.1989 respectively by converting into Class-IV employee and granted regular pay scale. On coming to know the said fact, the petitioner made several representations to the respondents for regularization. Thereafter, the respondents have considered the request of the petitioner and regularize the services of the petitioner vide proceedings dated 16.3.2000 giving effect from 20.08.1993. However, the main grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that since G.Mohan Murali and Smt B.Ayamma who are juniors to the petitioner, drawing higher scale than the petitioner, hence, he made representations to the respondents with a request to grant pay scale on par with them giving effect from16.01.1989. but the request of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondents vide impugned proceedings dated 16.05.2012. Challenging the same, the present writ petition came to be filed. 3. The counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent. in the counter, it is stated that the Petitioner was appointed as Watchman on 18.11.1983 on contingent basis. Subsequently, the petitioner's services were converted into Last grade posts and he was given the minimum scale of Rs.740-1150 from the date of issue of G.O.Rt.No. 1413 Education 3 Department, Dt.20.8.1993 since 157 Contingent posts were converted into Last Grade Service posts vide this office Proc.Rc.No.2442/C2-1/93, Dated.25.1.1994 as approved by the Government. It is stated that one Sri.G.Mohan Murali and Smt.B.Ayyamma were appointed on 19.11.1983 and 21.11.1983 as Sweeper and Helper respectively on contingent basis. Their services were converted into last grade service w.e.f.16.01.1989 and 14.02.1989 respectively. The Govt. further in G.O.Ms.No.344, Finance and Planning (FW.PRC.I) Dept., dt.13.11.1989 has issued orders for payment of remuneration in the minimum pay scale applicable to the last Grade Employees to the agreement reached between the Govt., and various service Associations on 22.10.1989 as follows: "In pursuance of the above agreement, Govt. hereby ordered that the full time contingent employees in Govt., including those in the Projects who have been continuing as Contingent employees for more than (5) years but could not be converted into Last Grade Services shall be paid a remuneration of Rs.740/- p.m. They will also be entitled to Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance and City Compensatory allowance on the above remuneration at the rates admissible at the respective places of their duty form time to time to other Govt., employees" These orders will come into force from 01.10.1989. As on the date of issue of the G.O., the petitioner has not been converted from the post of Contingent to Last Grade Services and drawing the remuneration of Rs.238/- and not reached the remuneration of Rs.290/-, Further, It is stated that the Respondent Society submitted proposals to the Govt. seeking permission to implement minimum pay scale of Rs.740-1150 to full time contingent employees who have completed (5) years of service as per the orders of Govt., in G.O.Ms.No.344. Thereafter, the Government issued orders vide G.O.Rt.No.1413. Education (Prog.III) Dept., dt.20.8.93 accepting the 4 proposals submitted by the 1" Respondent for the conversion of (157) contingent posts into Last Grade service posts. Based on the said orders all the Full time Contingent employees working in various schools under the management of 1stRespondent Society were allowed the minimum pay scale of Rs.740-1150 from the date of G.O. The petitioner is the one of the employee in 157 members. In view of this, the Petitioner is junior and not senior as claimed by him. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the stepping up of pay with juniors arises due to application of Automatic Advancement Scheme (AAS). In these cases, the senior gets promotion without availing the benefit of Automatic Advancement Scheme as the case be and gets his pay fixed in the promotion post and the junior gets promotion after getting the benefits of AAS and he gets his pay fixed accordingly. In the present case, the petitioner is not senior to his juniors as claimed by him. The stepping up of pay is applicable to only those availing the benefit of Automatic Advancement scheme. But, the petitioner is requesting for stepping up of his pay on par with juniors with effect from 16.1.89 i.e. the regularization date of his juniors. Moreover, the Govt. issued Circular Memo No.5476-A/1371/FR.II/07, dated 12.3.2007 ordered that, the representations of the Senior Govt. servants must be received up to a period of five years after the promotion of their junior. In these circumstances only, the plea of the petitioners was rejected stating that the stepping of pay is not applicable in the case as they are not promotees. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5 4. Heard Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for the respondents. 5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents made in the petition, prays to allow the present writ petition. 6. Whereas, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents opposed for allowing the writ petition and prayed to dismiss the same. 7. Perused the material on record. 8. On a perusal of the record, it is observed that, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was appointed 18.11.1983 on contingent basis. Thereafter his services were regularized by the 1strespondent vide proceedings dated 16.3.2000 w.e.f. 20.08.1993. 9. The contention of the petitioner is that since Sri G. Mohan Murali and Smt B.Ayamma who are juniors to the petitioner were drawing higher scale than the petitioner. 10. It is further observed that the petitioner made a representation to the 1st respondent through the 2nd respondent, and on receipt of such representation, the 2nd respondent made an endorsement dated 31.05.2010 stating that “the grievance of the petitioner found correct with reference to SR entries and requested the 1st respondent to issue favourable orders of 6 revision of pay fixation as sought by the petitioner fixing the pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 16.01.1989 instead of 20.08.1993 on par with the date of his junior G.Mohan Murali.” 11. As seen from the representation made by the petitioner to the 1st respondent through the 2nd respondent, wherein, the 2nd respondent made an endorsement, reads as under: Roc No.SPLIAI / 2010 Dated: 31-05-2010 Submitted to the Secretary, APRS, Hyderabad. It is submitted that the grievances of the incumbent found correct with ref. to SR entries copies of relevant pages of SRs enclosed. It is requested the 1st respondent to issue order in favour of early orders of revision of pay fixation as sought for by the incumbent fixing the pay of the incumbent at Rs. 740/- w.e.f. 16.01.89 instead of 20.08.93 on par with the date of his junior G.Mohan Murali, converted Class IV APRS, Kaluvabugga and with its consequential benefits i.e. increments, pay fixations, Spl Grade, SPP I etc., to count from 16.01.89. Principal 12. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court is of the view that, already the 2nd respondent made an endorsement that the grievance of the petitioner found correct with reference to the SR entries, and requested the 1st respondent to issue favourable orders of revision of pay fixation as sought for by the petitioner, deems fit to dispose of the writ petition while declaring the action of the respondents as illegal and arbitrary. 13. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the case of the petitioner and grant pay scale on par with his juniors giving effect from 16.1.1989 and pass appropriate orders in 7 accordance with law, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 14. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date : -04-2025 Gvl 8 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITON No.35828 of 2012 Date : 10.04.2025 Gvl 9