GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. N GARUDESHWARA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal by the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by Secretary to Government, Education Department and the Commissioner of Collegiate Education, Hyderabad, is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 28-12-1996 made in W.P.No. 21613 of 1996. The respondents 1 to 19 herein are the writ petitioners. They filed the writ petition for the following relief: '...the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents in not fixing our salary by giving notional increments, by treating the entire service rendered by the petitioners from the dates of petitioners respective appointments as part-time lecturers as regular service in terms of the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court made in W.A.NO. 642 of 1988 dated 8-3-1991 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to us under Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to refix our salary and granting to petitioners notional increments by calculating the service rendered by petitioners from petitioners respective dates of appointment as part-time lecturers and other consequential benefits to which we are entitled pursuant to such refixation and pay scales and career advancement scheme." The facts, is of in belief germane to the decision- making be noted and they are as follows: The writ petitioners have been appointed on part-time basis as Lecturers in the respondent No. 20-collge on different dates. Since their services were not regularized, as the College was not admitted to grant-in-aid, they approached this Court by filing W.P.No. 3304 of 1986 which was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said order, they preferred W.A.No. 642 of 1988. The said writ appeal was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court directing the appellants herein to release grant-in-aid to the posts in the respondent-college with effect from 1-03-1991. Accordingly G.O.Rt.No. 351 dated 04-03-1992 was issued. The writ petitioners are aggrieved to the extent that notional increments and fixation of their pay has not been done. However, they state that their service for the purpose of seniority and pension has been reckoned by the Government.

(2.) Opposing the writ petition, on behalf of appellants 1 and 2 it was contended that no specific direction was given by the Division Bench in the order in W.A.No. 642 of 1988 dated 08-03-1991 and as per the policy of the Government, when the college is admitted to the grant-in-aid, irrespective of the length of the service of the teaching staff, they have to commence with the initial basic pay in the respective scale with effect from 1-03-1991.

(3.) The learned single Judge, after referring to the operative portion of the order of the Division Bench in W.A.No. 642 of 1988 dated 08-03-1991, has opined that the writ petitioners are not entitled for arrears for past period. The learned single Judge, however, opined that from that observation it could not be said that the writ petitioners are not entitled for fixation of pay. So opining, the learned single Judge, by the order under appeal, disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the appellants herein that the pay of the writ petitioners should be fixed notionally from the date of their entry into service till 1-03-1991 and thereafter they are entitled to actual monetary benefit in their respective scales attached to the post. Hence this appeal by the State and its authorities.