( 1 ) IF a non-graduate entered service as local candidate and subsequently became a graduate and thereafter his services were regularised, should the benefit of advance increments for graduation, be given to him from the date of graduation or from the date on which his services were regularised? that is the question for determination in this petition under article 226 of the Constitution, ( 2 ) THIS petition had come up in the first instance before a single Judge, venkataramiah, J. who referred it to a Division Bench under the proviso to S. 9 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, as he doubted the correctness of the ruling on this question by Jagannatha Shetty, J. in B. R. Kumbar v. State of Mysore (1974) 1 Kar. L. J. 83. ( 3 ) THE material facts in this case are not in dispute. The petitioner joined service on 8-11-1960 as a Local Candidate in the cadre of Second grade Stenographer. He became a graduate by passing the B. A. degree examination, the results of which were declared on 23-10-1967. On 5-4-68 he was granted fqur advance increments on account of his becoming a graduate subsequent to his joining service. His services were regularised with effect from 7-11-1969. Subsequently, the authorities took the view that the aforesaid four advance increments should have been given, only with effect from the date on which his services were regularised, i. e. 7-11- 1969, and not with effect from the date of his becoming a graduate and ordered that his pay should be refixed by sanctioning advance increments with effect from 7-11-1969 only and that the excess payment to him should be recovered from him. In this petition he has challenged the proposed action of the authorities. ( 4 ) THE basis fox the above decision of the authorities, was the government order dt. 20-12-1967 (marked Ext. B), the relevant portion of which reads as follows : government are pleased to direct that such of the Local Candidates who were graduate II Division Clerks or Typists on 1-4-1962 or who became graduates subsequently on appointment regularly as per relevant rules of recruitment etc. to these posts be given higher starting pay of Rs. 92 or an increase of Rs. 12 over their pay in the scale of rs. to these posts be given higher starting pay of Rs. 92 or an increase of Rs. 12 over their pay in the scale of rs. 80-150 from the date of regularisation of their services or the date of graduation whichever is later provided their pay on regular appointment is fixed as per Rule 41a and that the pay drawn by them as local Candidates was in the scale of Rs. 80-150. This order is effective from 1-4-1962. ( 5 ) THE Government Order dt. 25-6-1962 provided inter alia, as follows :. After detailed consideration Government are pleased to direct as under- (i) Graduate recruited to the 2nd Division Clerical or Junior assistants' post on or after 1-1-1961 will be entitled to a starting pay of Rs. 92 per month in the revised scales of Rs. 80-150. (ii) Non-graduate II Division Clerks or Junior Assistants who graduate while holding the II Dn. Clerical or Junior Assistants' posts on or after 1-1-1961, will also be entitled to a higher start of Rs. 92 or an increase of Rs. 12 over their pay, whichever is more advantageous to them from the date of their graduation. ( 6 ) BUT, by a, subsequent Government Order dt. 24-7-1962, the Government purported to clarify that the benefit cf the Government Order dated 25-6-1962 would not apply to Local Candidates. ( 7 ) IN B. R. Kumbar v. State of Mysore, Jagannatha Shetty, J. , held that in view of the subsequent. Government Order dt. 24-7-1962, the benefit of the earlier Government Order dt. 25-6-1962 could not be extended to Local Candidates. We shall now examine whether it is permissible for the Government to make a distinction between regularly recruited officials and Local candidates whose services were subsequently regularised, for the purpose of the benefit of advance increments for graduation subsequent to entry into service. ( 8 ) IN the Karnataka Civil Services Rules 1958 made by the Governor of Karnataka in exercise of the powers conferred under the proviso to art. 309 of the Constitution the term Local Candidate has been defined in sub-rule (27a) of Rule 8 as a temporary Government servant not appointted regularly as per rules of recruitment to that service. ( 8 ) IN the Karnataka Civil Services Rules 1958 made by the Governor of Karnataka in exercise of the powers conferred under the proviso to art. 309 of the Constitution the term Local Candidate has been defined in sub-rule (27a) of Rule 8 as a temporary Government servant not appointted regularly as per rules of recruitment to that service. ( 9 ) NOTE- 4 to sub rule (15) (a) of Rule 8 reads : note-4-Service as a 'local Candidate is to be treated as officiating or temporary service, for service, for purposes of grant of increr ments, leave, pension etc. , ( 10 ) AS Note 4 to Rule 8 (15) provides that service as Local Candidate is to be treated as officiating or temporary service for the purpose of grant of increments, no distinction can be made between the service as 'local Candidate and officiating or temporary service for the purpose of grant of increments. After having provided by its order dt. 25-6-1962 that second Division Clerks and Second Grade Typists who were non-graduates when they joined service, and graduated themselves while holding such second Division posts on or after 1-1-1961, would be entitled to advance increments, it was not permissible for the Government to treat Second division Clerks and Second Grade Typists who entered service as Local candidates and whose services were subsequently regularised, differently from other Second Division Clerks and Second Grade Typist who were regularly recruited and were officiating or temporary, for purposes of granting such advance increments. Such differential treatment would run counter to what is provided in Note 4, sub-rule (15) (a) of the Karnateka civil Service Rules which places the service as Local Candidate at par with officiating or temporary service for purpose of grant of increments. ( 11 ) THE learned Government Advocate did not dispute that if there be any conflict between the provisions of rules made under the proviso to art. 309 of. the Constitution and the Government Order made in exercise of the executive pqwer under Art. 162 of the Constitution, the former should prevail over the latter. ( 11 ) THE learned Government Advocate did not dispute that if there be any conflict between the provisions of rules made under the proviso to art. 309 of. the Constitution and the Government Order made in exercise of the executive pqwer under Art. 162 of the Constitution, the former should prevail over the latter. However, he contended that the term 'increments' occurring in Note 4 to Rule 8 (15) (a) refers only to ordinary increments in the time scale of pay and not to advance increments granted to officials for having passed the Departmental examinations or for having become graduates subsequent to entry into service. ( 12 ) THERE is nothing in the language of Note 4 to Rule 8 (15) (a) which warrants such a narrow construction of the term 'increments' as suggested by the learned Government Advocate. The term 'increments' is a generic expression which is wide enough to include not only increments in the time scale of pay but all other kinds of increments. ( 13 ) WE hold that the Government Order dt. 24-7-1962 which makes the earlier Government Order dt. 25-6-1962 inapplicable to; Local Candidate and the Government Order dt. 20-12-1967 which provides that the advance increments for haying become a graduate subsequent to entry into service should be given to Local Candidates, only from the date of regularisation of their services, are inconsistent with Note 4 to Rule 8 (15) (a) of the Karnataka, State Civil Services Rules and hence are invalid. We further hold that the petitioner was entitled to get advance increments from the date of his graduation. ( 14 ) IN B. K. Kumbar's case (1) the effect of Note 4 to Rule 8 (15) (a) was not considered by Jagannatha Shetty, J. Hence the decision therein is not correct in our opinion. ( 15 ) IN the result, we allow this petition and direct the respondents to forbear from re-fixing the pay of the petitioner or from recovering from him any amount on the basis that advance increments should be given to him from the date of regularisation of his services. ( 16 ) IN the circumstances of the petition we direct the parties to bear their own costs. --- *** --- .