1. Teacher in aided school received advance increments for multiple qualifications; authorities initiated recovery proceedings claiming entitlement was limited to two increments. (Para 3 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 749
1997(4) Supreme 446
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Andhra Pradesh High Court)
K. Ramaswamv and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.
V. Gangaram - Appellant
versus
Regional Joint Director & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3297 of 1997
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 21954 of 1996)
Decided on 25-4-1997
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: D. Prakash Reddy and Mrs. D.B. Reddy, Advocates.
For the Respondents: T. Anil Kumar, Advocate.
Important Points
The court held that an employee is entitled to additional increments only for qualifications relevant to their specific post. For a Junior Lecturer, only two increments (M.A. and M.Ed.) are permissible, and excess payments beyond this entitlement are recoverable from the employee's pension.
Subject
Employment Law - Teacher Pay and Benefits
Act Referred
PENSION ACT: S.11
SERVICE LAW: .
SERVICE LAW: .
Headnote
SERVICE LAW - Additional increments - Appellant originally appointed as a Teacher/Head Master in Private aided school - Appellant went on improving qualifications for B.A., M.A., B.Ed. and M.Ed.-Revision of pay scale granting advance increments as and when he acquired qualification - challenged-Appellant now holding post of Junior Lecturer - He is entitled to only two additional increments, namely, for acquiring his M.A. and M.Ed. qualifications - Authorities have wrongly applied G.O. Ms. No. 928 and G.O. Ms. No. 266 Finance and Planning dated 17.11.1986 - Excess amount paid from 1985 is liable to be recovered from pension payable to appellant.
Held that he is entitled to the revised scale of pay giving the additional increments on two qualifications, namely, M.A. and M.Ed. and, therefore, he is entitled to the computation of the scale of pay then applicable to him prior to the date of immediate month in- which examination was conducted of the scale of pay plus two additional increments. He is not entitled to the four increments, as successively claimed. We hold that he is entitled only two increments, as indicated above. Since the Department itself has adopted above approach, we direct that arrears paid prior to 1985 are not to be recovered and excess amount from 1985 is liable to be recovered from the pension payable to the appellant. Instalment should be proportionately distributed so as not to cause any undue hardship.
(Para 6)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the appellant was entitled to four advance increments for acquiring multiple qualifications or limited to two based on the post held. (Para 3 )
3. The appellant, holding a post requiring M.A. qualification, is entitled only to two additional increments for M.A. and M.Ed. qualifications. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. Additional increments for qualifications are limited to those relevant to the post held, and recovery of excess payments may be adjusted from pension. (Para 6 )
5. Recovery of arrears prior to 1985 waived; excess amount from 1985 onwards to be recovered from pension in installments. (Para 6 , 7 )
6. How many additional increments is a Junior Lecturer entitled to under G.O. Ms. No. 928?
A Junior Lecturer, whose post requires an M.A. qualification, is entitled to only two additional increments—specifically for acquiring M.A. and M.Ed. qualifications. (Para 5 , 6 )
7. Can the government recover excess increments paid to an employee from their pension?
Yes, excess amounts paid due to incorrect application of pay scale increments can be recovered from the pension payable to the employee, provided installments are distributed to avoid undue hardship. (Para 6 )
8. Under what conditions can recovery of arrears for qualification increments be limited?
The court may direct that arrears paid prior to the date the employee became eligible for the specific post are not to be recovered. (Para 6 )
ORDER
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad, made on August 19, 1996 in OA No. 2944/93.
3. The appellant was originally appointed as a Teacher Head Master in a Private aided school on November 9, 1959 in the scale of Rs. 45-120. After his passing Secondary Grade Degree Training Examination in the
year 1967, he was granted on December 1, 1967 SGBT scale of Rs. 80-150 w.e.f. the aforesaid date. In view of the fact that the appellant went on improving his qualifications for B.A., M.A., B.Ed. and M.Ed., the authorities went on giving revisions of the pay scale granting advance increments as and when he acquired the qualification on the pay-scale applicable at the relevant time. Impugned proceedings were issued to recover the said amount paid to him on the premise that he was not entitled to the advance increments more than two. The Tribunal has dismissed the petition. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
4. The Government in G.O. Ms. No. 928 Education Department (K) dated September 13, 1977 has envisaged the grant of the additional increment on the minimum qualifications prescribed for the relevant categories, as indicated below:
(a) One Increment for B.A. or equivalent degree.
(b) One Increment for B.Ed.
(c) One Increment for M.A. or equivalent Post Graduate Degree.
(d) One Increment for M.Ed."
5. Admittedly, he is now having the post of Junior Lecturer which requires the M.A. qualification and, therefore, he is only entitled to two additional increments, namely, for acquiring his M.A. arid M.Ed. qualifications. They have stated in the illustration as under:
448
4. The additional financial coment involved to the management in the implementation of these orders will be considered for assessment of teaching grants due to the schools under GRANT -IN-AID."
6. On the basis thereof, the appellant is entitled to only two additional increments, namely, one increment for M.A. and thereafter one for M.Ed. Under these circumstances, the authorities have wrongly applied the G.O. Ms. No. 928 and G.O. Ms. 266 Finance and Planning dated November 17, 1986. While issuing the notice, it was confined to the question of recovery of the arrears paid to him from the year 1985, the year in which he is eligible to acquire additional qualifications for holding the post of Lecturer. Thus, it could be seen that he is entitled to the revised scale of pay giving the additional increments on two qualifications, namely, M.A. and M.Ed. and, therefore, he is entitled to the computation of the scale of pay then applicable to him prior to the date of immediate month in which examination was conducted of the scale of pay plus two additional increments. He is not entitled to the four increments, as suceessively claimed. We hold that he is entitled only two increments, as indicated above. Since the Department itself has adopted above approach, we direct that arrears paid prior to 1985 are not to be recovered and excess amount from 1985 is liable to be recovered from the pension payable to the appellant. Instalment should be proportionately distributed so as not to cause any undue hardship.
7. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Appeal accordingly disposed of.
*****************
