JUDGMENT :- 1. The Petitioner has projected the instant writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned letter No.S(1)/4643/2009 Na Pa dated 16.3.2011 issued by the second respondent and to quash the same. Further, he has sought for issuance of an order by this Court in directing the respondents to consider his case for granting two advance increments with effect from 5.1.2009, the date of sitting for the last examination for M.B.A. degree he acquired and resultantly to revise his basic pay on 5.1.2009 and pay him all consequential arrears therefor from 5.1.2009 within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court. 2. It is the stand of the Petitioner that it is the policy of the Government of Tamil Nadu to grant two advance increments to the Government servants, who acquire M.B.A., a Post Graduate degree, if the knowledge acquired could be made use of in the Department in which an individual is working. Pursuant to the policy, in Engineering departments of the State, viz. Public Works Department, Highways Department, etc., Engineers at level were granted two increments on acquiring M.B.A. from the date of sitting in the last examination. 3. According to the Petitioner, he studied M.B.A. Degree course in Alagappa University during the year 2006 to 2008 and passed the said M.B.A. Degree, as per the results published on 17.3.2009. It is the plea of the Petitioner that in terms of Fundamental Rules, 26 and as per the then existing policy of the first Respondent/State Government, he is entitled to get two advance increments from the date of sitting for the examination of M.B.A. viz. 5.1.2009. It comes to be known that he made a representation on 22.7.2009 to the second Respondent through proper channel claiming two advance increments for acquiring the M.B.A. Degree on 5.1.2009. His request was forwarded to the first and second Respondents on 9.2.2010. The first Respondent sought for certain details and specific recommendation as to the utility of M.B.A. in Public Works Department from the second Respondent/Engineer-in-Chief (W RO) and Chief Engineer (GI), Public Works Department, Chennai. 4. The second Respondent, by way of reply dated 29.11.2010, made his specific recommendation as to the manner in which M.B.A. is useful to Public Works Department and sought orders of the first Respondent for granting two advance increments to the Petitioner for acquiring M.B.A. Degree. 4. The second Respondent, by way of reply dated 29.11.2010, made his specific recommendation as to the manner in which M.B.A. is useful to Public Works Department and sought orders of the first Respondent for granting two advance increments to the Petitioner for acquiring M.B.A. Degree. The second Respondent, in the said letter, also brought to the notice of the first Respondent/Government that the other Assistant Engineers were granted two advance increments for obtaining M.B.A. degree from the date of last sitting of the examination and paid with the arrears from that date and recommended to grant two increments. 5. Further, the first Respondent/Government of Tamil Nadu has refused to consider the case of the Petitioner and returned the proposal on 16.3.2011 by placing reliance on the orders of the Government in G.O. Ms.No.154 P & AR Department dated 26.10.2010, which is impugned in the present writ petition. The pith and substance of the contention of the Petitioner is that G.O. Ms. No. 154 P & AR Department dated 26.10.2010 mentions that the order takes into effect only from the date of issuance of G.O. and when the first Respondent/Government of Tamil Nadu had sanctioned two increments for Assistant Engineers, who acquired M.B.A. Degree before the Petitioner and after him, it could not deny the same without any basis whatsoever to the Petitioner. In effect, the categorical plea of the Petitioner is that the said G.O. Ms. No.154 P & AR Department dated 26.10.2010 is not applicable to him since he acquired M.B.A. Degree prior to the issuance of the said G.O. and hence, denying/rejecting his request by thefirst Respondent through communication dated 16.3.2011 is not in accordance with law. 6. To lend support to his contention that G.O. Ms. No.154 P & AR Department dated 26.10.2010 is not applicable to the Petitioner's case, the Learned counsel for the Petitioner relies on the order of this Court dated 23.1.2013 in W.P. Nos.7170, 15887 of 2010 and 6397 of 2012, wherein in paragraphs 7 to 11, it is observed and held here under:-" 7. It is not in dispute that the Board granted two advance increments for acquiring MBA degree to some of the Assistant Engineers or the Board. The petitioners are also similarly placed persons. Hence, I am of the view that the petitioners are also entitled to two advance increments as given to others. 8. It is not in dispute that the Board granted two advance increments for acquiring MBA degree to some of the Assistant Engineers or the Board. The petitioners are also similarly placed persons. Hence, I am of the view that the petitioners are also entitled to two advance increments as given to others. 8. However, it is submitted by the respondents that G.O.Ms.No.154, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (FR-I) Department, dated 26.10.2010, was passed cancelling G.O.Ms.No.825, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (FR-I) Department, dated 6.7.1977, that granted advance increments for acquiring MBA degree. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to claim advance increment. 9. I am not inclined to agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, since all the petitioners acquired the MBA qualification before 2009 itself and the persons, who are similar like that of the petitioners, were granted two advance increments. 10. It is well settled that G.O.Ms.No.154, dated 26.10.2010 cannot take away the accrued right of the petitioners, who acquired MBA Degree before 2009 itself and therefore, the said GO would only operate prospectively. 11. For all above reasons, a direction is issued to the first respondent Board to grant two advance increments to the petitioners, from the date on which they acquired MBA qualification, with all monetary benefits. The first respondent is directed to pay the arrears within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the above terms, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs." 7. Following the order of this Court dated 23.1.2013 in W.P. Nos.7170, 15887 of 2010 and 6397 of 2012, wherein a direction has been issued to the first Respondent therein to grant two advance increments to the Petitioner therein from the date on which he acquired M.B.A. degree with all monetary benefits, this Court allows the present writ petition by issuing direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant two advance increments to the Petitioner from the date viz. 5.1.2009, the date on which he acquired M.B.A. Qualification with all consequential monetary benefits. The first and second Respondents are directed to pay the monetary arrears to the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.