JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the judgment rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 05.04.2000, Annex.-3 passed in Original Application No. 293/1998 and order dated 25.05.2000 passed in the review petition filed by the petitioner and, further, for seeking direction to the respondents to grant the petitioner 4 advance grade increments in the pay-scale of Rs. 330-560 on account of his qualifying in the Appendix II-A Examination on 22.02.1973 and to grant all consequential benefits. 2. According to brief facts of the case, original application was filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal, in which, he has prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 28.07.1998, Annex.-A/1 and for direction to the respondents to revise the applicant's pay scale in the grade of Rs. 330-560, after taking into account four advance increments consequent upon his passing appendix II-A examination along with arrears and interest at the rate of 18%. 3. In the original application, it was contended that applicant was granted four advance increments on passing appendix Part II-A examination in the first attempt of the pay-scale of Rs. 130-300 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/- with effect from 22.02.1973 and this benefit was granted under communication dated 17/27-05-1969. After fixation at Rs. 150/- with effect from 22.02.1973 upon implementation of Third Pay Commission, the grade of Clerk Grade-I was revised from Rs. 130-300 to Rs. 330 - 560 with effect from 01.01.1973. Therefore, the applicant who was already allowed four advance increments and was fixed at Rs. 150/- with effect from 22.02.1973 was to be given the benefit of fixation in the pay-scale of Rs. 330-560 with effect from 01.01.1973 while treating the petitioner's pay at Rs. 150/- but this benefit was not granted to the petitioner and, thereafter, when benefit of implementation of Third Pay Commission, the grant of advance increments after qualifying appendix II-A examination was discontinued which was challenged individually by the employee and also the union raised the same before the proper forum. 4. 150/- but this benefit was not granted to the petitioner and, thereafter, when benefit of implementation of Third Pay Commission, the grant of advance increments after qualifying appendix II-A examination was discontinued which was challenged individually by the employee and also the union raised the same before the proper forum. 4. The controversy attained finally after the judgment of the Apex Court upholding the judgment of the Calcutta Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, wherein, it was held that the employee who qualified the appendix II-A examination up to 31.05.1981 are entitled for advance increments, the Board circulated a letter dated 07.02.1996 with reference to its letter dated 23.01.1996 enumerating scheme in terms of the judgment of the Calcutta Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal and directed to allow three increments in Grade II as long as employee served in Grade II and four increments in Grade I in terms of letters dated 09.08.1961 and 01.04.1968. 5. The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal was that he had cleared appendix II-A examination in the month of February 1973 and he was granted benefit of four advance increments in the existing pay scale of Rs. 130-300 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/-, therefore, after implementation of the recommendation of the Third Pay Commission in the revised pay scale of Rs. 330-560 he was to be granted benefit of four advance increments but illegally while making fixation the pay of the petitioner was fixed as on 01.01.1973 at Rs. 330 and further he was granted increment of Rs. 10/- on 03.07.1973 when he was working, as Clerk Grade-I and pay was fixed at Rs. 340/-; meaning thereby, the benefit of four advance increments which were already allowed to the petitioner when he was running in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 was not allowed when recommendation of Third Pay Commission was implemented with effect from 01.01.1973 which is totally illegal and unfounded. 6. Before approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner filed representation to the respondent department but vide impugned order Annex.-A/1 to the original application, prayer of the petitioner was rejected, against which, he preferred the original application. But, his original application was also dismissed vide the impugned order dated 05.04.2000. 7. 6. Before approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner filed representation to the respondent department but vide impugned order Annex.-A/1 to the original application, prayer of the petitioner was rejected, against which, he preferred the original application. But, his original application was also dismissed vide the impugned order dated 05.04.2000. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the learned Tribunal has committed gross error while rejecting his original application for the relief sought for by him because admittedly in the pay-scale of Rs. 130300 petitioner was granted four advance increments upon passing appendix II-A examination in first attempt and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/-, therefore, as per recommendation of the Third Pay Commission, in the corresponding pay-scale of Rs. 330-560, he was to be given the benefit of four advance increments but, while making fixation, he was again fixed at Rs. 330/- as on 01.01.1973. Therefore, the judgment under challenge rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal deserves to be set aside and petitioner is entitled for the benefit of four advance increments in the revised pay-scale as per recommendation of Third Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.1973 and is entitled to all the consequential benefits. 8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently submits that petitioner was already granted four advance increments in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/- on account of passing appendix II-A examination with effect from 03.07.1972, therefore, at the time of revision of pay scale, again, he was not entitled to get four advance increments because said benefit was already granted to him when he was running in the pay-scale of Rs. 130-300 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/- after passing the appendix II-A examination. Learned counsel for the respondents invited our attention towards Schedule A filed along with reply and submitted that it is evident from Schedule-A that petitioner's salary was fixed at Rs. 150/- while granting him four advance increments in the pay-scale of Rs. 130-300 upon passing the appendix II-A examination, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner and judgment rendered by the Tribunal does not require any interference because it is based upon cogent reasons. 9. 150/- while granting him four advance increments in the pay-scale of Rs. 130-300 upon passing the appendix II-A examination, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner and judgment rendered by the Tribunal does not require any interference because it is based upon cogent reasons. 9. After hearing both the parties and considering entire record of the case, it emerges from the facts that admittedly the petitioner was initially appointed on 28.04.1971 in the pay scale of Rs. 110-180. Therefore, he was recruited on 02.07.1971 as Clerk Grade-I in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300. After completion of one year's service on 03.07.1972 on the post of Clerk Grade-I, he was granted increment of Rs. 5/- and his pay was fixed at Rs. 135/-. Thereafter, in the month of February 1972 the petitioner passed appendix II-A examination, therefore, on the basis of Annex.-A/1, he was granted four advance increments upon passing the said examination and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/-. 10. Admittedly, recommendation of Third Pay Commission was implemented with effect from 01.01.1973 and petitioner's pay was to be revised as per the new pay scale corresponding to old pay scale of Rs. 130-300 with effect from 01.01.1973. It is not disputed by the respondents in their reply that after passing appendix II-A examination, the petitioner was not entitled to get four advance increments. Moreover, it is admitted position of the case that benefit of four advance increments was granted to the petitioner when he was running in the old pay scale of Rs. 130-300 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 150/-; meaning thereby, the admissibility of granting four advance increments upon passing appendix II-A examination is not disputed. Moreover, it was granted to the petitioner by the respondents when he was getting salary prior to recommendation of Third Pay Commission. Therefore, obviously when the petitioner was already granted four advance grade increments prior to implementation of the recommendation of Third Pay Commission, then, at the time of revising his pay as per the recommendation of Third Pay Commission, lie was to be granted fixation of pay while treating his pay at Rs. 150/- in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 in the pay scale of Rs. 330-560. But, it has not been granted to the petitioner and, again, petitioner's pay was fixed at Rs. 150/- in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 in the pay scale of Rs. 330-560. But, it has not been granted to the petitioner and, again, petitioner's pay was fixed at Rs. 330/- which was minimum of the revised pay scale corresponding to old pay scale of Rs. 130-300. In this view of the matter, the learned Tribunal has erroneously rejected the petitioner's original application and has wrongly held that petitioner was not entitled for fixation after granting benefit of four advance increments because after passing appendix II-A examination which was condition precedent to get four advance increments the petitioner was already granted four increments in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300. therefore, at the time of revising pay of the petitioner as per recommendation of the Third Pay Commission his pay was to be treated as Rs. 150/- In the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 because he was already granted four advance increments and his fixation was to be made in the pay scale accordingly which has not been done erroneously. 11. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed. Order impugned dated 05.04.2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, so also, order of review dated 25.05.2000 and order dated 28.07.1998 impugned in the original application No. 293/1998 are hereby quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to make fixation of the petitioner's pay in the revised pay-scale Rs. 330-560 while treating his pay at Rs. 150/- in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 from the date of implementation as per recommendation of the Third Pay Commission and grant him all consequential benefits arising out from the said fixation with arrears, within a period of three months.Writ Petitioner allowed. *******