JUDGMENT :

(Arvind Kumar Verma, J.)

1. The challenge in the instant petition is to order dated 30/01/2019, whereby the claim of the petitioner for continuance of two advance increments has been closed.

2. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

Relief sought:

10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the order dated 30/01/2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 3 and the order dated 28/12/2018 (Annexure P/2) passed by respondent No.1.

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to respondent authorities to refixed the pay scale of the petitioner after adding two advance increments in the newly fixed pay scale of the petitioner and the petitioner may kindly be paid his salary accordingly from 19/01/2005 onward and further the benefit of two advance increments should be given to the petitioner on the revision of his future pay scale.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.

3. Facts of the case in the nutshell are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Grade-III vide order dated 24.01.1992. The wife of the petitioner had undergone family planning operation (Tubectomy) on 29.07.1999. On account of the family planning operation the benefit of two advance increments has been granted to the petitioner vide order dated 23.08.1999. The petitioner got the above benefit till December, 2004. Subsequently vide order dated 19.01.2005, the petitioner promoted to the post of Assistant Grade-II in the pay scale of Rs. 4000- 100-6000, but the benefit of advance increment was not extended to the petitioner. Even vide order dated 28.12.2005 while the pay scale of the petitioner has been fixed, but the above benefit of two advance increments on account of family planning operation has not been granted and as such petitioner not getting the benefit of advance increments. The petitioner made a representation on 18.09.2018 before the respondent No. 3 for continuance of the above two advance increments, which has been disposed by the respondent No. 3 vide order dated 30.01.2019 giving the reference of order dated 28.12.2018 passed by Law Department. Hence, this petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of respondents are unconstitutional, discriminatory and not sustainable in the eye of law. Relying the order passed in the matter of A.K. Kesharwani v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others passed in WPS No. 4486/2005 dated 09/03/2010, he submits that the above issue has already been settled by the Hon’ble High Court, but instead thereof, the respondents have denied to grant the benefit of advance increments to the petitioner. He further submits that the advance increment granted to the petitioner cannot be classified as personal pay granted to the petitioner under any of the circumstances enumerated in clause-9 (23) (a) & (b) of the Fundamental Rules.

5. Ex-adverso counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2 submits that by virtue of family planning operation of petitioner's wife, the benefit of two advance increments was already extended to the petitioner vide order dated 23.08.1999. The grievance of the petitioner that the said benefit is not extended continuously is without substance, because, as per the rules such benefit of two advance increment has to be extended in the pay scale till further revision of the pay. It is further submitted that there is no provision in the rules to continue such benefit. Intimation received (Annexure P/2) reads as under:-

^^izksRlkgu Lo:i nh tkus okyh vfxze osruo`f) dk YkkHk] dsoy izpfyr osrueku esa osru dk vkxkeh iqufuZ/kkj.k gksus rd gh izkIr gksrk gSA pwafd vfxze osruo`f) dk YkkHk fujarj fn;s tkus ds laca/k esa fu;eksa esa dksbZ izko/kku ugha gSA vr% iz'kkldh; foHkkx ds izLrko ij vlgefr O;Dr dh tkrh gSA^^

He submits that there is no illegality or infirmity on the part of the respondent. The petiti