1. M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).--------Shabbir Hussain's appeal is against the order of the Government whereby it has been stipulated that the maximum number of advance increments for obtaining qualifications, higher than the minimum prescribed for the post, such as M. A., M. Sc., M.
2. Ed., and M. A. (Education) qualifications, will be three for all the qualifications. An advance increment or increments allowed for one qualification shall also be counted towards any second or third qualifications and only differential increment or increments, if any shall be allowed. This order has been enforced vide F. D. Government of the Punjab's Notification No. FD-PR-10-71/72 dated 27- 1-1976 whereby the Schedule appended to the National Pay Scales 1973, was amended a new note (1-A) has been added between Note 1, Note 2.
2. The factual position is that the Teachers who obtained additional qualifications higher than those the minimum prescribed to the post like M. A., M. Sc., M. Fd. And M. A. (Education) their pays have been governed as follows:------- Pay Revision Rules, 1970: Prescribed scale under Pay RevisionRs. 300 - 25 -- 450/30-750. One Rules, 1970, w. e. f. 1-6-1970advance increment for M. A. (2nd Div.), two advance increments for M. Sc., (2nd Div.) and three advance increments for M. Ed., or M. Ed.
3. (Tech). Or M. A. In Education in the ordinary time scale.
4. Pay Revision Rules, 1973.
5. Prescribed scale under National PayRs. 350 - 25-475/25-600/30-750.
6. Scales Rules 1979, w. e. f. I-7-1973.One advance increment for M. A.
7. (2nd Div.), two advance increments A for M. Sc. (2nd Div.) and three advance increments for M. Ed. Or M. Ed. (Tech.) or M. A. (Edu.).
8. The amendment made on 27-1-1976 is reproduced below:---- (Note 1 -A).
9. With reference to existing entries in the "Remarks" column against Serial 5, of part 1 of the Schedule, on page 7 and serial 4) of part 11 of the .Schedule on 12, the maximum number of advance increments admissible for M. A., M. Sc., and M. Ed., shall be three. An advance increment or increments allowed for one qualification shall also be counted towards any second or third qualification and only differential increment or increments (if any) shall be allowed. For example, if a holder of a post has already obtained one advance increment for M. A. Qualification and later obtained M. Sc. Or M. Ed., he will be allowed one increment for M. Sc. And two increments for M. Ed.
10. And similarly if he has obtained two increments for M. Se. He will be allowed one increment for M.
11. Ed.
3. The parties have been heard. The main contention of the appellant is that they are entitled to one, two or three separate advance increments for each of the higher qualifications and the amendment could not have retrospective effect. The Government on the other hand is of the view that the entitlement is only limited to the maximum of three advance incre--ments. In this connection, the Finance Department issued a clarification to the Accountant General, Punjab, on 14-4-1975 as the Accountant General's view was different. On 27-1-1976 an addition to the schedule and foot notes of the Punjab (Non-Gazetted) Teaching Staff (National Pay Scales) Rules, 1973, were issued by the Government.
4. The legal position appears to be that until 27-1-1976 those teachers who obtained additional higher qualification like M. A., M. Sc., M. Ed., or M. Ed. (Tech.) or M. A. (Education) were entitled to advance increments prescribed for each of these qualifications but those teachers who obtained their second or third additional qualifications after 27-1-1976 will be entitled to a maximum of three advance increments. Even otherwise, the additional qualifications for which advance increments were sanctioned have no relationship with one another. Some of the qualifications like M. A., M. Sc.
12. Are merely academic in nature while the others like M. Ed., M. Ed. (Tech.). Or M. A. (Education) are professional in character. The theory of maximum number of increments would rationally apply only if all the qualifications were in one line of specialization. The addition of 27-1-1976 although called an addition is actually an amendment of the then existing rules. The amendment itself (foes not say that the Punjab Teaching Staff Rules have been amended from the date the main Rules came into force and, therefore, no such construction of retrospectiveness can be deduced. Since the amendment is not with retrospective effect it can only be applied prospectively. The question however remains to be determined whether those who obtained the additional qualifications prior to 27-1-1976 but were not actually given the advance increments by the Accountant General, Punjab, or the Accounts Officer are entitled to advance increments or not without the maximum limit laid by the amendment of 27-1-1976. We are of the opinion that the discretion of an Officer like the Accountant General or Accounts Officer cannot adversely affect the entitlement provided the Officer concerned had actually obtained the additional qualifications before 27-1-1976. We are informed that after the acquisition . Of the requisite qualification no further order was necessary to draw the prescribed number of increments. In the circumstances. Only entitlement under then existing rules can be the just and equitable basis for determination. For the reasons detailed above the appeal of the appellant who obtained his additional qualifications before 27-1-1976 is, therefore, accepted.