of Madhya Pradesh & Anr Vs. Shakri Khan  INSC
580 (19 April 1996)
K.Ramaswamy, K.G.B. Pattanaik (J)
JT 1996 (5) 112 1996 SCALE (4)446
O R D
have learned counsel on both sides.
by special leave arises from the order dated January 21, 1994 of the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior
Bench in O.A. No. 323/93. The admitted facts are that the respondent was
appointed prior to 1973.
Government had introduced the scheme of granted two advance increments for the
Lower Division Clerks who passed the Hindi typewriting test. They prescribed
the last date for passing the test as July 30,1973 and those who passed the Hindi
typewriting test prior to that date was declared eligible to get two advance
increments. Since the respondent could not pass the test within that period but
passed the said test in December, 1979, he filed the O.A. claiming the said
benefit on the basis of certain instructions issued from time to time, viz.
dated April 20, 1974, January 15, 1979 etc. Which are marked as Annexure R-3 to the paper book.
On that basis, it was contended that he is also entitled to the benefit of two
advance increments . On principle, we agreed with the State that the Government
having had the power to extend the benefit it also has the power to put a
cut-off date. Consequently, the cut-off date, viz., July 30,1973 for passing the test is a proper classification. All those
who did not pass the test prior to that date, but appointed earlier to that
date are not eligible to two advance increments on their passing the said test
after the cut- off date.
contented that the said order is not insisted upon with regard to those
candidates who passed the test after July 30, 1973. It is made clear by the respondent
that the Government have issued orders for recruitment of LDCs with the
qualification of passing the typewriting test with effect from that date.
Therefore, they did not insist upon passing the test for advance increments nor
such an employee is granted any advance increment. It is then contended by the
counsel for the respondent that though those who were appointed after that date
were not given incentive of two advance increments, by necessary implication
those who were appointed earlier are entitled to two advance increments as
incentive. We do not appreciate the contention as well- founded. Since the
Government have taken a decision to appoint the candidates with typewriting
examination as a qualification, the need to give additional increments to new
appointees, after the appointment, does not arise. It would arise only in the
case of candidates who were appointed prior to the introduction of typewriting
test as a qualification which was not prescribed earlier but who were given
time for passing the test. The cut-off date was accordingly fixed as the test.
The cut-off date was accordingly fixed as July 20, 1973 and those passed the test prior to
that date alone were made entitled to two advance increments and those who passed
the test thereafter are not entitled to the said benefit.
this declaration has been given, since we are informed that the State has not
filed appeals against same orders passed by the Tribunal in similar cases, the
payments made to the respondent is directed not to be recovered. This law will
be applicable to all pending cases or any candidate who approaches the court
appeal is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
Pages: 1 2