Telangana High Court
K.Pattabi Rama Rao, Hyd vs Registrar Admn, High Court Of Jud ... on 15 February, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION Nos.5165 and 13331 of 2016
COMMON ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
Regard being had to the controversy involved in the
aforesaid cases, they were heard together and are being
decided by a common order.
The facts of W.P.No.5165 of 2016 are reproduced as
under:
The present writ petition has been filed for quashment
of an order dated 13.10.2015 by which the benefit of FR 22(B)
was withdrawn in respect of the petitioner consequent to his
promotion from Junior Civil Judge to Senior Civil Judge.
Learned counsel appearing for the High Court is fair
enough in informing this Court that the controversy involved
in the present case stands concluded on account of a
judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.30587 of 2010, dated 28.02.2019.
The judgment delivered by this Court in W.P.No.30587
of 2010 is reproduced as under:
"Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,
the learned Standing Counsel for the High Court for
respondent Nos.1 and 3 and the learned Government
Pleader for Services for respondent No.2.
2. The petitioner is a Judicial Officer governed by the
provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Services
Rules, 2007; for short, 'SJS Rules'; which have been made
in exercise of power under Articles 233, 234, 235 and 237
read with the proviso to Article 309 and the proviso to
Clause (3) of Article 320 of the Constitution of India. Rule
19 among those Rules provides the Conditions of service. It
reads as follows:
(a) Pay and allowances: Pay and allowances of
members of the service shall be as recommended
by the National Judicial Pay Commission from time
to time and accepted by the Government.
(b) A member of the service shall be eligible for such
leave and leave salary and such traveling
allowance as is admissible to the member of the
Indian Administrative Service governed by the All
India Service Leave Rules, 1955 for the time being
in force.
(c) A member of the service shall be eligible for the
other pensionary benefits regulated under the All
India Service (death-cum-retirement benefits)
Rules, 1958, which are in force at the time of his
appointment.
(d) The A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and
Appeal) Rules, 1991, the A.P. Civil Services
(Conduct) Rules, 1964, the Fundamental Rules,
the A.P. Leave Rules, 1933 and the Pension Rules
for the time being in force shall insofar as they may
be applicable, and except to the extent expressly
provided in these Rules, govern members of the
service in the matter of their pay, allowances,
leave, leave salary, pension and other conditions of
service.
3. Thus, while pay and allowances of the members of
the service shall be as recommended by the National
Judicial Pay Commission from time to time and accepted by
the Government, different rules, including those in Clause
(d) of Rule 19, including the Fundamental Rules are made
applicable; would apply. Thus, Fundamental Rule 22 B
along with its proviso becomes applicable. Therefore, there
is no room for any controversy; and, the benefit of
Fundamental Rule 22 B read with the proviso thereto would
apply to those members of the service who are governed by
the SJS Rules. G.O.Ms.No.60 dated 07.05.2003 issued by
the Government of Andhra Pradesh pursuant to the
recommendations of the National Judicial Pay Commission
provides, among other things, for Assured Career
Progression Scales. Whatever enures on the basis of the
ACP Scales as provided in that Government Order would
fall within Clause (a) of Rule 19 of the SJS Rules which
provides that pay and allowances of the members of the
service shall be as recommended by the National Judicial
Pay Commission from time to time and accepted by the
Government. The provision for ACP Scales is thus made a
component as applicable to the Officers to which that would
apply in terms of G.O.Ms.No.60 dated 07.05.2003.
Therefore, there is no warrant for any exclusion of the
benefit of Fundamental Rule 22 B as regards emoluments
that would be available in terms of that Rule and the
proviso thereto.
4. In view of aforesaid reasons, this Writ Petition is
ordered declaring that the Judicial Officers are entitled, on
promotion, to the benefit of pay as per Fundamental Rule
22 B in terms of Rule 19(d) of the SJS Rules read with
G.O.Ms.No.60 dated 07.05.2003. The impugned decisions
of the Government and the communication of the Registry
which are contrary to this declaration are hereby set aside.
Consequential action shall be taken by the High Court and
the Government to make available such benefits as may be
available to be released.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also
stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs."
In the light of the aforesaid, the impugned orders dated
13.10.2015 and 12.02.2016 in both the writ petitions
respectively are hereby quashed and the present writ
petitions stand disposed of.
The judgment delivered by this Court in W.P.No.30587
of 2010 dated 28.02.2019 shall be applicable mutatis
mutandis in the present cases also.
Let a copy of the order passed by this Court in
W.P.No.30587 of 2010 dated 28.02.2019, be kept on record in
the present cases.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
______________________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
15.02.2022
vs
