Judgment :- (Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order made in O.A.No.2403 of 1994 dated 12.08.2003 on the file of the Tamil Nadu State Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, quash the same and consequently direct respondents 1 and 2 to revise and refix the scale of pay of the members of the petitioner association at Rs.3700-5000 as per Rule 5(b) issued in G.O.Ms.No.215 Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993.) K. Suguna, J. This writ petition has been filed as against the order passed in O.A.No.2403 of 1994 dated 12.08.2003. 2. The Director of Co-operative Audit, Chennai has passed an order dated 15.03.1994, wherein, Special Grade Scale of Pay of the Co-operative Auditor has been fixed in the scale of Rs.2500 – 4200. Challenging this, O.A.No.2403 of 1994 has been filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer to fix the scale of pay in the Special Grade scale of pay of Co-operative Auditor in the scale of Rs.3700 – 5000, which is the ordinary scale of pay of the Joint Registrar of the said Department. But the same has been rejected by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. Challenging the same, the above writ petition has been filed. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as per clause 5(b) of G.O.Ms.No.215, Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 22.03.1993, the posts for which there is no promotional avenue, Special Grade of pay has to be fixed as per Annexure I of the said G.O. But according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, treating the post as Co-operative Auditor as if there is no promotional avenue available, the scale of pay fix under Annexure II has been granted, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.215. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as far as Annexure I is concerned, the same is applicable only in respect of the posts for which there is no promotional avenue at all. Even as per the averment made in the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, promotional avenues are available for the post of Co-operative Auditor, where only Clause 5(b) of the said G.O is applicable and not clause 5(a). Even as per the averment made in the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, promotional avenues are available for the post of Co-operative Auditor, where only Clause 5(b) of the said G.O is applicable and not clause 5(a). According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as far as the post of Co-operative Auditor is concerned, the first level of promotion is Assistant Director and the ordinary scale of pay for the said post is Rs.2200-4000. The second level promotion for the post of Co-operative Auditor is Joint Director and the ordinary scale of pay for the said post is Rs.3700–5000. Relying Clause 5(b) of the said G.O., learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the special grade scale of pay of the petitioner should have been fixed in the scale of Rs.3700–5000, but on the contrary, by invoking Annexure I, which is applicable only to posts for which there is no promotional avenue, the pay has been wrongly fixed in the scale of Rs.2500–4200 instead of Rs.3700-5000. That apart, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, by invoking Clause 5(b) of the G.O.Ms.No.215, the selection grade scale of pay has been rightly fixed in the scale of Rs.2200–4000 which is the ordinary scale of pay for the first level promotional post viz., Assistant Director. As such, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, special grade scale of pay has to be fixed in correspondence with the ordinary scale of pay for the second level promotional post viz., the Joint Director in the scale of pay of Rs.3700–5000. On the basis of the above reasons, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the Tribunal rejecting their claim is unreasonable and prays for allowing the writ petition and for a direction to fix the special grade scale of pay of the Co-operative Auditor in the scale of Rs.3700–5000. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 has contended that even as per Clause 5(b) of G.O.Ms.No.215, the petitioner-Association is not entitled for the special grade scale of pay of Rs.3700–5000. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 has contended that even as per Clause 5(b) of G.O.Ms.No.215, the petitioner-Association is not entitled for the special grade scale of pay of Rs.3700–5000. According to him, as against the order passed in O.A.No.5239 of 2004 by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal dated 20.10.1994, the applicant therein has filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11568 of 1995 in the Honourable Supreme Court and the same has been dismissed by the Honourable Supreme Court by order dated 12.06.1995. As such, the learned Government Advocate has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. We have considered the submissions of the respective counsel. 6. Originally in the V Pay Commission, no special grade scale of pay has been awarded. Subsequently in the year 1990, by G.O.Ms.No.304 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 28.03.1990, the Government has directed scheme of selection grade and special grade to be allowed to all the employees eligible for movement to selection grade and special grade as indicated in Annexure I to the G.O. Subsequent to this, since there was an anomaly in the fixation of the selection grade/special grade pay, O.A.No.1625 of 1991 has been filed and based on the orders passed in the said O.A., the Government have issued G.O.Ms.No.215 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 22.03.1993. Based on the said G.O., the petitioner-members are seeking the special grade pay in the scale of Rs.3,700–5,000. But admittedly, Clause 5 of the said G.O. reads as follows: 5. Accordingly, in partial modification of the orders issued in para 9 of the G.O.Ms.No.666, Finance (PC) Department, dated 27.06.89, the Government direct that the scheme of Selection Grade and Special Grade be allowed to all the employees eligible for movement to Selection Grade and Special Grade as indicated in the Annexure -I to this order replacing the existing Appendix VII to the G.O.Ms.No.666, Finance (PC) Department dated 27.06.89. "Provided further the Selection Grade and Special Grade scales shall be regulated as follows: (a) For posts, having no promotional avenue, the Selection Grade and Special Grade shall be allowed as prescribed in the Annexure – I to this order; (b) For posts, having promotion posts in their regular line, grant of Selection Grade scale above the Ordinary Grade of promotion post would result in anomalous situation of placing persons in higher post on a lower scale compared to persons in lower post (in Selection Grade). In order to avoid discontentment among senior persons in higher posts, the Selection Grade scale in such cases shall be restricted to the Ordinary Grade of first level promotion post and the Special Grade shall be restricted to the Ordinary Grade of second level promotion post; (c) Employees in the existing special temporary posts shall be treated as holders of Selection Grade in the revised pay structure." 7. As per Clause 5(b) of the said G.O., the same is applicable only to those cases wherein the Selection Grade Scale of Pay is fixed above the ordinary Grade Scale of Pay of the promotional post. Likewise where the special Grade Scale of Pay has been fixed above the ordinary grade scale of pay of the second level promotional post, it has to be restricted viz., the selection Grade Scale of Pay has to be restricted to the ordinary grade scale of pay of the first level promotional post and the special Grade Scale of Pay has to be restricted to the ordinary grade scale of pay of the second level promotional post and not as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.215 dated 22.03.1993, selection grade scale of pay has to be fixed in correspondence with the ordinary scale of the first level promotional post and special grade scale of pay has to be fixed in correspondence with the ordinary scale of pay of the second level promotional post for all the categories. If this contention has to be accepted, the object for which G.O.Ms.No.215 has been issued will also be defeated since in Clause 5(b) thereof, it has been specifically stated as follows: (a) For posts, having no promotional avenue, the Selection Grade and Special Grade shall be allowed as prescribed in the Annexure – I to this order; (b) For posts, having promotion posts in their regular line, grant of Selection Grade scale above the Ordinary Grade of promotion post would result in anomalous situation of placing persons in higher post on a lower scale compared to persons in lower post (in Selection Grade). In order to avoid discontentment among senior persons in higher posts, the Selection Grade scale in such cases shall be restricted to the Ordinary Grade of first level promotion post and the Special Grade shall be restricted to the Ordinary Grade of second level promotion post; 8. As such, this G.O. is applicable only to restricting the selection grade/special grade scale of pay in the event of its fixation higher than the ordinary scale of first level promotion post and second level promotion respectively and not for fixing the selection grade and special grade to the ordinary scale of first level promotion and second level promotion. As such, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted and that will also defeat the purpose of G.O.Ms.No.215. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.