STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH Vs. P.K. ISSAC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was given two advance increments in his salary having passed the Accounts Training held in August 1974 and the pensionary benefits were calculated accordingly. Later on the benefit of two increments given to the petitioner was withdrawn and fresh calculation of pensionary benefits were made. Aggrieved by the said order of the Government the petitioner filed a writ petition (WP(C) 230 (AP)/2003) (CR 6063/96), The learned Single Judge found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefits of two advance increments he having passed the Accounts Training and the order of the Government withdrawing the benefits given to the petitioner was held to be illegal. Consequently the writ petition was allowed and the order of withdrawing the benefits given to the petitioner was quashed with a direction to the respondents to clear all retiral/pensionary benefits of the petitioner Including the benefit arising out of the said two advance increments within a period of three months. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is filed by the Government.

(2.) THE learned Advocate General appearing for the State has urged that while, adjudicating upon the question of granting two increments for completion of the Accounts Training, the learned Single Judge had not taken into consideration the letter No. 14025/25/76 -Ap. dated July, 1977 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, wherein it is stated that the two increments on passing the Accounts Training would be given from 1.1.1973. Admittedly, the petitioner/respondent passed the Accounts Training in the year 1974 and the notification was made effective from 1973. That being so, the, petitioner/respondent is entitled to the benefits granted to him on his successful completion of the Accounts Training, That being the position, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment and order dated 13.8.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge. The appeal shall stand dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.