The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petitiorrer: SRl. M. KRUPAKAR Counsel for the Resporrdent No. 't: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respcndent Nos.2&3: SRI S. BHOOPAL REDD\/, JU TUK I SVVKE]S The Court made the fol r:wing: ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA w RIT PETrTION No.16 I ol 2023 ORDER: Heard Sri M. Krupakar, tearned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, tearned Assistant Government Pleader for Socia! Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri S, Bhoopal Reddy, learned Standang Counset for Tetangana Sociat Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2. The oetitloner aDD roache the Court seekino or ver as under: "...to issue a Writ, Ordef or djrection more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2nd Responclent in issuing proceeding.s Rc. No_ Zone VI/ SGP/SGP/9/2021 dated 8.9.2022 recovering two annu! grade increments for 14 years from 2007 to 2O?_Z duly regulating the pay scale and not sanctioning the special grade increments 6 years and 12 years under automatic advancement scheme and the action of the 3'd respondent not sanctioning the annual grade increment which is due w.e.f. I .1O.2022 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 74, 16 and 2l of the Constitution of India and consequentl;, direct the respondents to release and pay annual qrade increment which is due w.e.f. t.lO.2022 and 2 SN, J \\ r 1618 2023 6 years ,::,1 12 years special grade incr'lmen' lnder Automatir- .,Cvancement Scheme and to pass...".

3. The cas,: :rf the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner had applied for :he post oF Art Teacher. The 2nd responrlent had issued appoirttn ent order, dated 26.06.t997 to the petitioner on contract bas s. The then Government of Andhra Pradesh had issued G.O.l,lsr.rlo.59 dated 10.08.2007 for regularization of services of the :ontract teachers working in APSWF.EI Society and accordingly the services of the petitioner were rerlularized and petition€:r t ras drawing regular increment for 14 y<:ars. As per G.O.Ms.t\Jo. iB, dated 15.04.2015 the petitioner is erltitled to Special Gradr: ir crement for 6 years and 12 years. 3 (i). The p :'titioner's further case is that thc ugh he completed 11: y::ars of service, petitioner had not been granted SPP IA anC S;PP IB 6 years and 12 years special grade irtcrement under autontat r: advancement sdheme as per G.C.lrts.No.39, dated 15.4,,101!i. The respondent No.2 to the shcc< of the petitioner harJ issued proceedings dated 08.09.2022 to the petitioner infor ning that petitioner's regularization had taken place w.e.f, i'9.12.2009, but petitioner was sanctioned increments v/itf effect from the date of initial appointft ent i.e., 3 SN, J wP 1638 2023

01.70.2OO7 and therefore excess amount paid to the petitioner had to be recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner made a representation dated 6.L0.2022 to the 2'd respondent. The 3.d respondent failed to grant annual grade increments which are due w.e.f. 1.1.0.2022 contrary to law. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD A. Thelm Duqned Memo vr'de Rc.No.Zone6lSGP lsGPt9t 2021. dated O8.O9.2O22 i sued to the Detitioner is extracted hereunder "In the reference cited the Principal TSWRS/JC Narayankhed, Sangareddy District has submitted the proposal of Sri N. Yellaiah, Art Teacher for sanction of sanction of SGP & SPP-1 (A) scale on completion of 12 years incremental service. The proposal is verified and found that the individual was appointed as (Art) on 01.10.2007. His services were regularized w.e.f. 29.12.2OO9 i.e. the date of acquiring of qualifications to hold the post of TGT. He is eligible for sanction of annual grade increment on completion of requir:ed service to earn the increment from the date of acquisition of qualifications, in terms of Rule 10(g) of State and subordinate service rules 1996. But, he was sanctioned increments from the date of initial appointment, which found 4 SN, J \,I' 1638 2023 to be inr:c,rr:,ct and his pay needs to be regulated anc e)(cess paid am,l rr t to be recovered. -tlte'efore, the Principal, TSWRS/]C, lrlarayanl,.hed, Sangared:1r )istrict is hereby directed to inforrn the :;arre to Sri N. Yg!!1iah, Art Teacher and regularize his pgy. and recover e).cess amount paid fr al and submit _!f e oroposal for Automatic Advanr:er!]]gE! scheme", B This Cor rt vide its order dated 2 .O1.2023 Da anterim order in favour of the letitioner, oDservinq as u nd er: "Nol i:e Before Admission. F'cst :rfter four (4) weeks. Learred Government Pleader for Socia Welfarr: for the respo rdent No.1 and Sri S.Bhupal Reddy for the responciern N os.2 and 3. Lear -ed counsel for the petitioner submits that without i:;uing any notice to the petitioner, the responcen s; issued present impugned orders to recorer the excess iin ount paid to the petitioner .under autonratic advance:rnt nt scheme and requested to pass nt:)rim ord e rs. - . P,jm ; facie, this Qourt i.s considered the view that in impugnr:r1 r-ders no reference with regard to notice to the petitionr-.r . nd the respondent No.2 directed the responrient No.3 to Te( over the excess amount paid to the petitioner. ln view_ql_ the e t r s -/ 5 h r o .20 List on 20.O2.2023". c affi vit nd her extracted here u nder: o s r n r P n SN, J wP 1638 2023 o21 I P N o .12 to 1 2nd '12. Whereas in case of the petitioner, at the time of regular appointment, the qualifications of the petitioner is BFA (Painting) II class with 54.630lo from JNTU and TTC (Painting), Caste BC-D and the petitioner is not having qualification of Intermediate with 1't class.

13. Hence, he was appointed as unqualified teacher with a condition that he should necessarily acquire the requisite educational qualification i.e., Intermediate with 1st class within a period of (4) years from 01.10.2007 vide procgs.No. ZV / 23807 / 20 07 / Art/ U Ql 20 07, d ated t2. L 1.20 07 .

14. Further, respectfully submit that the services of the individual was erroneousiy regularized in the cadre of Art Teacher w.e.f. 1.10.2007 from the date of unqualified services vide this office procgs. No.Z-VL/238O7 /20O7(ART), Dated:14.07.2012. The same has cancelled vide procgs No.z-vt/ 23801 / CT / 2OOt, Date : 03.08.2016.

15. The 54fr Boar-d,.of I Governors resolved ol 29.12.2O09 with regard to Art Teachers that ,'those who have possessed BEA degree after SSC directly considered as eligible,,, Accordingly. the Petitioner was appointed as qualified 6 a SN, J w, 1618 2023 teacher *.,=. . 29.72.2009 and the services of the Petitictner were reg J a illed w.e.f 29,1'2.2009 vide this office lr(rcas No.Z-VII,r:,8 Y7/CT/2007, dated 03'08'2016 in the r:adrc of Art Tea ch e r,

16. In te respectfu l\/ Su bord in at e rule 10 (a) s of pay apP,ic or acq uires released:ll of acquirin g ) y to Paras 6 to 16 of the afidav t, 1': is ;.rbmitted that, as per Rule 10(g) of Sta -e and :;ervice Rules, no person appointed und3r sub - all be eligible to an increment in the tirnr: s:ale ;ble to him/her, unless he/she possr:ss th? trlsts r.he qualifications. And the increnrent \vill be ' after the completion of one year 11'6rn 1f g rJate . re q ua lification/reg u la rization. L7. Wher qualified tea the se rvic,-'s from 29.-.-1'.., on 29 12',2. Petition e r is after the regularizat ic :'as in this case, the Petitioner was appoirrtell as : her with effect from 29.72.2OO9; accr:rdirrgly, of the Petitioner v,/ere regularized wit h e''fect 109 i.e as per Board of Governors meetirrq held )09. Hence it is established rule th.lt the rntitled to Annual Grade Increment (AG t) :nly Dmpletion of one year from the date of - in the cadre. 18, The I)rincipal, TSWRS/JC Narayankhed, Sangart'ddy District has ubmitted proposals of the Petitioner for san< tion of SGP :;r:a tr (6) years and SPP-1A(12) yi:ars'scale vide Lr.No.A1i l 2 ),rEsttl2022, dated 27.02.2022' /\fter examination ni th" p.oposals of the Petitioner:, the 'Prlnc pal, . TSWRS/JC I arayankhed was'informed' that, Sri-N. -Yr:llaiah, Art Tea,:he' was appointed (Art) on 01.10.2017 as unqualifieri. '1is services were regularized w.e.f. 29.:2 2:)O9. Hence, he i: eligible for sanction of annual grade increrlent t 7 SN, J wP t63E 2023 on completion oF required service to earn the increment from the date of acquisition of qualifications, in terms of Rule 10(g) of State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. But, he was sanctioned increments from the date of initial appointment, which found to be incorrect and his pay needs to be regurated and excess paid amount to be recovered and further the principal was directed to regularize his pay and recover excess amount paid from the individual and submit the proposal for Automatic Advancement scheme vide this office Memo No.Zone6lSGp/ SGp / g / 2O2t, dared 08. 09. 2022. 19. Further, the petitioner has submitted representation dated 06.10.2022 for sanction of SGp(6) years and Spp_. IA(12) years scale in the cadre of Art teacher, the request of the individual was examined and the principal, TSWRSTC Narayankhed, Sangareddy District was directed to submit action taken report on the instructions issued Memo No. Zone6lSGp/SGp/9/212t, dated 08.09.2022 and the petitioner was informed that the instructions issued vide Memo dated 08.09.2022 is holds good vide this office memo No. Zone6lSG p / SGp / g / 2O2 1, dated OB. t2.2022,, . DISCU SI A D CON CLUSI N

5. The learned counsel appearing. .on behalf of the petitaoner contends that no pfior 1gtiFe had been issued to the pgtitionef prior to issuance of impugned Menro dated Oa.O9.2OZ2 of the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 vide the said proceedings impugned in 8 SN, J wP 1638 2023 the present rrurit petition directed the 3'd respondent to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner unilaterally . rnd arbatrarily in clear violation of grrinciptes of natural ju: tice.

6. Admit:e:lly as borne on record the petitioner lacr not been put on any ncl"ice prior to the issuance of the impugred order dated 0B.Cr-cr,'122 by the 2nd respondent heretn and the impugned orrle [s had been passed, to recover the exce:,s amount paid to the p|iitioner under Automatic Advancentent Scheme, unilaterally r r lear violation of principles of natural iL st ce.

7. The saicj 'tct is not disputed even by the lear,.red counsel appearing or rehalf of the respondents who hower'e., placing reliance on :he averments made in the counter affid,:v t filed by the 2nd rr:s;p:,ndent in particular para Nos. 12 to 19 ( referred to ilrd extracted above) contends that petitiorer is not entitled for the relief as prayed for by the petitioner herr,)in, since excess amoUnt; had been sanctioned to the petitionr:r from the date of petitio ter's initial appointment w.e.f. 01.10.2007 and therefore; th€ irpugned order, dated 0g.09.2022'issued by the 2nd respondent ^rarrants no interference. 9

8. Law is weil setHed that when an action is proposed to be taken, which is rikery to adversery affect the interest of a party he or she is entitled to a notice. SN, J wP t638 2023 A) h A 2 o9 1 s c Vs. TE OF U x M N TH PA D Y P D H A o HE e o H t r 1 & 1 u "Para 1O: The adherence to pranciples of natural justice as recognized by all civitized States is of supreme importance when a quasi_judicial body embarks on determining disputes between the parties, or any administrative action invotving civil consequences is in issue. These principles are well setfled. Th t o f n w a ls m vs thatn o h d r ru le. It n ea It h h s a n e . Tim te o n. n h h r d ow a au ,a es oul li b e d er d en or I to n a en e e ta d. b h u r or er b of th s a n b o u e o a n of I l c nd m ned le. n of th s a u n s IO SN. J (P 1638 2023 r It is after a ll a 11 ice. princirrle-s-- of nat approved rule of fair PlaY' The concePt lra s gained si9 rificance and shades with time' Whern the histori : document was made at Runnymede in 1215, the first statutory recognition of this principlc fr)und its way into the "Manga Carta''' The classi: exposition of Sir Edward Coke c'f natural ju';tice requires to "vocate, interrogate and adjudi:ate". In the celebrated case of Cooper v. Wandsra orth Board of Works the principle was thus statel: (ER p.42O). "Eve God himself did not pass__ sen nce u on Adam before he wa s nto ma e his defence. 'A am (sa v s call ed re art thou? Hast tho f the God tree whcr€ of I command thee that thou shouldest not eat". Sinc( then the principle has been chiseled, honed and refineri, enriching its content' Judicial treatment has addec light and luminosity to the concept, like polishing <,f a diamond

9. Taki o int -o-EeIEiCSfiltiSn: (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on rehalf of the petitioner and the learned counse! appearng on behalf of the respondents, - t I SN, J wP t638 2023 (c) The contents of the impugned order dated 08.09.2022 issued by the Z"d respondent which admittedly, as borne on record, is without issuing notice to the petitioner and in clear viotation of the principles of natural justice, (d) The averments made in the counter affadavit filed by the 2nd respondent in particular para Nos. 12 to 19 (referred to and extracted above), (e) The interim order dated 23.OL.2O2} passed in the present writ petition which is in force as on date, (referred to and extracted above), (f) The observations in the Apex Court Judgment referred to and extracted above, The writ petition is allowed. The impugned Memo vr'de Rc.No. Zone6lSGp lSlcp/g/2021, dated O8.O9.2O22 is set aside. . It is however observed that it is open to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner if the respondents intend to do so in accordance to law by issuing notice to the petitioner by providing reasonable opportunity of pefsonar hearing to the ,petitioner ,rn t2 SN. J \\il r6i8 2021 conformity t/vit h principles of natural justice' lHowever' there shall be lro order as to costs' As a : equel, the miscellaneous petltic)ns' if any pending, i1 :ne Writ Petition shall also stand closecl' //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. PRATHIMA DEPUTY REGISTRAR :;ECTION OFFICER I To, 1 2 3

4. 6 7 The prin:i rar Secretary, Sociar werfare Department, sec etariat' secretariat l[ft,]'l+ill,'***i"##iil]"ft]T:1i!*[?i:;fl ti]:^-." The Pii r,rir ::1, Telangana : iffi'3iii: ]'Bi ylnry;smr',afliii",t"J*tci"' ro' the s'[ate or ::: ti1 U 1'J't'3il3"t3^"1E D DY' sc F o R r s w R t' r s to P U Cl Two Ct) C , Pies BM GJP c;c rooo" .J L1 ( ..* -, $E

5.q \'/ 10l n ,c.r ,.'; ... ''..// HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 ORDER WP.No.1638 of 2023 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

1.\ { !