The main legal point established in the judgment is that personal pay is attached to specific posts and scales of pay mentioned in the relevant Government Orders and is not applicable to other scales of pay.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the fourth respondent in PO3/1/303008g4/REV/2011-2012, dated 19.04.2011, quashing the same and directing the fourth respondent to revise the petitioner's last drawn pay as Rs.6,200/- instead of Rs.5,750/- and providing the petitioner with all the benefits including pension re-fixation, Pension Commutation, Commutes value of Pension, reduced pension, Death Cum Retirement Gratuity, Family Pension and other benefits and the Net Qualifying service of 28 years 11 months 18 days.)

1. This Writ Petition is filed to quash the impugned order, dated 19.04.2011 and consequently, directing the fourth respondent to revise the last drawn pas as Rs.6,200/- instead of Rs.5,750/- and to providing all the benefits including re-fixation, Pension Commutation, Commutes value of Pension, Reduced Pension, Death Cum Retirement Gratuity, Family Pension and other benefits and the Net Qualifying service of 28 years 11 months 18 days. 2. The brief facts of the case as stated in the affidavit is that the petitioner was working as an Assistant in the Department of Rural Development and was promoted as an Extension Officer (Athi Dravida) on 31.08.1998. The petitioner's annual increment for the Assistant post fell on 01.10.1998. As per the Fundamental Rule 22(b) provides that the petitioner shall exercise option for fixing the pay in the lower post i.e., Assistant and the annual increment pay i.e., 01.10.1998 in the post of Assistant. The petitioner is eligible to get 5% of personal pay with effect from 01.09.1998 and the petitioner has exercised the option. Hence, the petitioner's pay was fixed as below:

(a) Date of promotion as Extension Officer: 31.08.1998 A.N.

(b) Existing pay as on 01.09.1998 for the lower post: 4000-100-6000

(c) Add: 5% Personal pay as on 01.09.1998 in lower post: Rs. 245/- (as per the option of the employee)

(d)Pay after adding one regular increment as on 01.10.1998: Rs.5000+245=Rs.5,245/-

Therefore, the petitioner's pay was fixed for the post of Extension Officer following Rule 22(b) as follows:

4. Then the petitioner pay was fixed for the post of Extension Officer following FR 22(b) as follows:

                 3. The petitioner has opted for voluntary retirement which was permitted by the second respondent, vide proceedings, dated 31.07.2002. Thereafter, the proposal for retirement benefits were forwarded to the fourth respondent.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the fourth respondent ignoring the Fundamental Rule 22(b) reversed the entire process and has denied the 5% personal pay and the increment fixed for the earlier post of Assistant was removed. The order of the fourth respondent dated 19.12.2002 has stated that the pay fixed with effect from 01.10.1998, allowing 5% with effect from 01.09.1998 was not in order and the petitioner is not eligible for the 5% personal pay, accordingly directed to recover the excess amount paid and to refix as per the eligibility criteria. Moreover, the date of next increment was held as 01.10.1998, 01.10.1999 and 01.10.2000 etc. The contention of the petitioner is that because of the option that he exercised within one month of the promotion to the post of Extension Officer, he became eligible for 5% personal pay and increment in the previous lower post as Assistant and consequently, the petitioner's next increment in the promoted post fell on 01.10.1998. The impugned order passed by the fourth respondent has declined the claim of the petitioner by ignoring the option that the peti