Rao Vs. Govt. of A.P  INSC 397 (1 October 1993)
K. RAMASWAMY, K. SINGH N.P. (J) CITATION: 1995 SCC Supl. (1) 153
1. Delay condoned.
3744/SLA 3. The appellant is claiming his scale of pay as Asstt.
at Rs 7001600 with effect from April 1, 1976,
the date on which he was granted the scale of pay by the Principal. He filed
Review Misc. Petition No. 1665 of 1985 in the Administrative Tribunal, Andhra
Pradesh, which was dismissed by the impugned order dated October 30, 1985. His OA was also dismissed. His
sole contention is that G.O.Ms.
1072 dated November 26,
1976 made him eligible
to apply for the post of Assistant Lecturer on his having qualification of M.A.
Second Class with over 50% marks and as he had improved his qualification, the
Principal had correctly fixed his scale of pay from April 1, 1976. It is wholly misconceived. In G.O.Ms. No. 719-Education
dated July 3, 1978 it was stated that the condition of 5 years prescribed
earlier for application of revised pay scale of Rs 700-1600 to the Lecturers
(Junior Scale) namely, Assistant Lecturers working in affiliated colleges was
reduced to three years. Admittedly, he was regularised as an Assistant Lecturer
with effect from December
application of these guidelines he became eligible on completion of three years
as Assistant Lecturer. Therefore, his scale of pay as Assistant Lecturer was to
be fixed with effect from December 1, 1978.
contention of Shri Kanta Rao, learned counsel for appellant, is that the
appellant had put in 8 years of service as a tutor and his previous service
should be counted for the purpose of fixation of scale of pay as Assistant
Lecturer. It is also devoid of substance. It is not a case that the
instructions would give such a right.
reliance on an order passed by the Administrative Tribunal in C. Anjaneyulu v.
Principal, Govt. College, Khamman1 is of little assistance. There are no guidelines
or instructions or rules (statutory) issued by the Government that the previous
service rendered as a tutor would be counted to his service as Assistant
Lecturer. What all it postulates is that those tutors who did not get into the
post as Assistant Lecturers would remain as tutors, but + Arising out of SLP
(C) No. 4363 of 1986 and SLP... of 1993 (CC 17368) 1 R.P. No. 85 of 1979,
decided on July 30, 1983 155 no further recruitment as tutor be made. For
eligibility to get revised scale of pay similar to the Assistant Lecturer, the
period of service was suitably reduced. That does not mean that previous
service as a tutor was directed to be counted for the service as Assistant
Lecturer. The appellant is not, therefore, entitled to the fixation of the
scale of pay earlier to December
1, 1978. No doubt the
Tribunal had interpreted the rules wrongly and given the benefit to the
petitioner therein. That would not be a ground to extend the same principle to
the appellant. His contention that he is invidiously discriminated which
offends Article 14, is devoid of substance. Any wrong order or a negative
benefit given to an employee or non-action by the employer to remedy the same
illegality would not be a ground to extend the illegal benefit to the person
similarly situated. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the appeals.
They are accordingly dismissed. No costs.