F.R. 24

(1) The order withholding an ordinary increment in a time-scale must specify the period for which it is to be withheld if the order is to be operative. If the order does not state that the withholding of the increment shall have the effect of postponing future increments, it shall be assumed that the officer's pay is restored to what it would have been, had his increment not been withheld from the next natural date from which he would have drawn an increment.

The effect of an order withholding a particular increment is that the officer remains on the same pay without any increment for the period for which that order withholds that increment.

(2) (a) All orders withholding increments issued by administrative authorities in the case of audit gazetted officers should be scrutinized in audit to see if they are in accordance with the above instructions. As regards non-gazetted officers, heads of departments and officers will be responsible for seeing that the instruction is observed.

(b) When an increment of an officer is withheld with cumulative effect, it is not the intention that the instruction under Rule 24 should be applied.

(3) [Not Printed] (4) (a) Where it is proposed to withhold an increment in an officer's pay as a punishment, the authority inflicting the punishment should before the order is actually passed, consider whether it will affect the officer's pension, and if so, to what extent if it is decided finally to withhold the increment, it should be made clear in the order that the effect of the punishment on the pension has been considered and that the order is intended to have this effect.

Effect of stoppage of increment of pension

(b) [Not Printed]

[(5) (a) If a Government servant is suspended for misconduct, neither the period of suspension nor any period of service preceding the suspension shall be allowed to count towards the period necessary to earn an increment].

[G.O.Ms. No. 212, Finance, Dt. 16-5-1961]

(b) No Government servant shall be given his increment unless an increment certificate as prescribed in the Treasury Code Form 49 is signed by the drawing officer and attached to the pay bill.

These orders are applicable to all Government servants who are on incremental scales of pay whether the increments accrue annually or at other intervals. In cases in which increments are granted based on the assumption of completion of probation without an order by the competent authority, the drawing officer should record a certificate in the corresponding increment certificate to the following effect :

[Certified that the appropriate authority, not having passed an order declaring satisfactory completion of probation since a period of one year has elapsed after the due date for the completion of probation (including extension of probation) and the Government servant has also passed all the prescribed tests; satisfied all other conditions prescribed for completion of probation, and that no disciplinary proceedings as contemplated under General Rule 25 are pending against him on the date of expiration of the prescribed or extended period of probation, the probation is deemed to have been completed satisfactorily with retrospective effect from.....]

[Subs. by G.O.Ms. No. 424, Finance, Dt. 23-12-1964]

[The drawing officer should ensure that the above certificate is recorded on the periodical increment certificate whenever the increment is granted based on the assumption of completion of probation without an order by the competent authority].

[G.O.Ms. No. 208, Dt. 13-3-1964 and Memo. No. 32271/FR/63, Dt. 7-8-1963]

Notes 1 and 2 :— [Not Printed]

(6) and (7) [Not Printed]

[(8) and (9) Omitted by G.O.Ms. No. 315, Finance, Dt. 11-7-1972]

An authority withholding an increment of a Government servant should expressly state in the order that the period for which the increment has been stopped will be exclusive of any interval spent on leave before the period is completed.

Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CC&A) Rules, 1991 – Penalties as per Rule 9 – Stoppage of increments with or without cumulative effect – Currency of the penalty.

(Circular Memo. No. 34633/Ser.C/99, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, Dt. 04-11-99)

Ref. :—G.O.Ms.No.342, GA (Ser.C) Dept., Dated 04-08-1997.

Order :—Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1991 deals with "Penalties" and its classification as minor penalties and major penalties. Item (iv) specifies withholding of increment without cumulative effect which is a minor penalty and item (vi) specifies withholding of increment of pay with cumulative effect which is a major penalty. The currency of these penalties and their effect on promotion was ordered in the GO cited. The currency of the penalty is for a minimum period of one year during which the delinquent employee shall not be recommended for promotion.

According to FR 24 an increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld as a measure of punishment. An increment may be withheld from a Government servant by the State Government, or by any authority to whom the State Government may delegate this power if his conduct has not been good or his work has not been satisfactory. In ordering the withholding of an increment, the withholding authority shall state the period for which it is withheld and whether the postponement shall have the effect of postponing future increments.

It is clarified that where the penalty of stoppage of increments with or without cumulative effect is imposed, under Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, the increment or increments falling due immediately after the date of issue of the order should be withheld. It is also clarified that the employee whose increments were withheld shall not be recommended for promotion during the period for which the increments were ordered to withheld with effect from the date of the issue of the order imposing the penalty.

RULES REGARDING INCREMENTS

The A.P. Fundamental Rules 24, 25, 26, 27 and 31-A mainly govern the increments of Government employees.

[Increment should ordinarily be drawn unless it is withheld on account of misconduct or unsatisfactory work by the competent authority declared under CCA Rules]. [Rulings 1 and 4(a) under F.R. 24]

If increment is withheld, it should be indicated up to what period the increment has been withheld and whether it will have effect on the postponement of the future increments and whether it is exclusive of leave if any taken before expiry of a punishment period or not except in the cases with cumulative effect. The effect of the punishment on the pension should also be specified in the order if it is intended.

[No increment should be given unless an increment certificate in APFC Form 49 is enclosed by the drawing officer. If increments are granted on the assumption of satisfactory completion of probation without an order of a competent authority, the drawing officer should append a certificate in the increment certificate as prescribed therein].

[Ruling 5(b) under F.R. 24]

An increment watch register has been prescribed in G.O.Ms. No. 104, Fin. & Plg. (F.W.A. & L.) Dept., Dt. 8-3-76. In the same G.O. an amendment has been issued adding note as Note 3(3) under S.R. 13 under T.R. 16 of A.P.T.C., Vol. I.

According to this note, to ensure prompt drawal of increments the drawing officer should verify the S.Bs./S.Rs. of all his subordinates in the month of December of every year and maintain a register showing the names of all persons for whom increments are due in each month of succeeding year in the A.P.T.C. Form 106 (given below) and if persons are transferred to his office, their names should be entered in the relevant pages with reference to their rates of increments contained in the S.Bs.

INCREMENTS REGISTER (A.P.T.C. FORM 106)

[If a Govt. Servant is suspended for misconduct, the period of suspension and period of service preceding the suspension should not be counted towards period of service necessary to earn increment].

[Note 5(a) under F.R. 24]

[If suspended on account of imprisonment for debt and for other reasons other than misconduct only period of suspension would not count for increment. Earlier period of Service will count].

[Note 6 under F.R. 24]

F.R. 25 deals with the sanction of increment above the efficiency bar. Such increments should not be given without the specific sanction of the authority empowered to withhold increment.

F.R. 26 deals with the period of service which will count for increment.

All periods of duty in a post on a time-scale count for increment in that time-scale provided the total of periods which do not count for increments will have to be added to normal date of increment for the purpose of assuming the date of next increment.

(1) Regulation of pay of Govt. Servant whose date of seniority/ promotion has been revised : F.R. 26(aa) : —Pay may be refixed on the basis of notional duty in the post from time to time for these purposes. Only such periods for which the Government Servant would have officiated in the higher post should be taken into account and weightage allowed duly for such periods from the date or normal date of promotion. The non-qualifying periods such as E.O.L., suspension etc., should be deducted from such periods.

If he was already promoted before revision of seniority and given an earlier date of promotion arrears of refixation allowed only for periods during which he discharged duty in such higher post. If promoted before revision of his seniority but is promoted after review he will have to be allowed monetary benefit of pay fixation from the date of promotion duty.

In regard to selection grades if a selection grade post is allowed with reference to revised seniority, arrears are to be paid if duties have been discharged in the ordinary post. If seniority is lost, pay is to be brought down to ordinary scale ignoring the intervening appointment to Selection Grade Post and correct rate of pay so property fixed is to be allowed from the date of issue of orders.

Service that counts for increments

[If a Government Servant is transferred from one officiating post to another officiating post, the joining time has to be treated as duty in the post, the pay of which he has been drawn during that period will count for increment]. [Ruling 4(i) under F.R. 26(b)]

[While officiating, if sent to training, counts of training which is treated as duty will count for increment in the officiating post, if he is allowed the pay of the post during the training].

[Ruling 4(ii) ]

[Officiating service in a lower post time scale will not count for increment in the lower post with higher scale without the specific sanction of the Government].

[Ruling 9 ]

[A Government Servant can also count his officiating service in the higher post for increment in that post if he is subsequently appointed to it either in an officiating or permanent capacity. Rule 26(c) should be applied also to officiating Government Servant without substantive post].

[Ruling 2 of F.R. 26(c)]

[The increment under F.R. 26(c) is to be allowed irrespective of the fact whether the higher post is within or outside the Department to where the employee belongs].

[Ruling 3 ]

[If a probationer is confirmed at the end of period of probation exceeding 12 months, he is entitled to claim retrospectively the increments which but for his probation he would have reached].

[Ruling 2 under F.R. 26(a)]

[Passing of an Examination or test confers on a Govt. servant the title to any right, benefit or concession, such should be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination or test which he passed. If it can be passed in instalments the title should be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination]. [Ruling 2 under F.R. 26(b)]

[Period of overstayal of leave does not count towards increment unless under F.R. 85(b) it is converted into E.O.L. and under F.R. 26(b) E.O.L. is allowed to count for increment]. [Ruling 2 under F.R. 26(b)]

The Head of Department may permit an unpassed clerk under his control to rise to the top of the time-scale, if :

He has passed atleast one of the Spl. or Departmental tests.

He should have passed himself deserving of the concession by his work and conduct.

(2) Drawal of increments by the Probationers :—

[Where the period of probation is two years and whose increment is annual, the probationer is entitled to draw the first increment after commencement of probation his second increment will have to be drawn only w.e.f. the date following the date of declaration of probation but the period of service from the date of the first increment shall count for subsequent increments]. [F.R. 32(2)(i)(a)]

[Where the period of probation is one year and the increment is annual, the first increment after the commencement of probation is to be drawn from the date following the date of declaration of probation. But the service from the date of regular appointment will count for subsequent increment]. [F.R. 31(2)(i)(b)]

[The above conditions will apply only to the increments drawn in the time-scale of the post but not to the advance increments sanctioned under F.R. 27 or higher stage allowed under F.R. 31(2) etc.]. [Ruling 1 under F.R. 31-A]

[In the case of retrospective regulation of service, the increments already drawn will not be affected and the first increment after the commencement of probation occurring under F.R. 31-A(2) may be taken as meaning the first increment due after issue of the order declaring the commencement of the probation]. [Ruling 2 ]

(3) Sanction of efficiency bar increment : (F.R. 25)

Where an efficiency bar is prescribed in a time-scale the next increment after such bar should not be given without the specific sanction of authority competent to withhold increments.

(4) Sanction of premature increment : (F.R. 27)

The premature increment can be granted to a Government servant on a time-scale by the authority competent to create a post in the same cadre. In the same time-scale of pay that means of generally the Government is competent to sanction premature increments.

This power cannot be executed to grant of premature increments :—
(i) as reward for meritorious work;

(ii) in disregard to the advice given by the Finance Department in any individual case of fixation of pay;

(iii) In disregard to the normal rules governing fixation of pay except in case of hardship or where the circumstances are unusual.

(iv) to take into account the monetary equivalent of certain prerequisites allowed, Special Pay drawn or deputation allowance granted in a previous post, for the purpose of fixing the initial pay on appointment to another post when such monetary benefits are not permissible.

[The above conditions will not however affect the use of F.R. 27 where specifically allow under separate Government Orders already in existence].

[Note 2 under F.R. 27]

Advance increments :—If the due date of increment falls during the middle of the month i.e., after first and before the last day of the month it is to be admitted from first of the month as per the order issued in G.O.Ms.No 133, Fin. & Plg. Dept., dated 15-7-74.

Increments :—As the experience and efficiency of an employee grows with service, he will be able to turn out better and more work. Increments are granted usually every year and in certain cases biannually to employees to compensate the increased volume of work they will be able to render as their service continues. Increment is not therefore a charity conferred on the Government servants. Government servants earn increments as of right with the increase in their efficiency and capacity to put up more volume of work as their experience grows with every year of service. F.R. 24 lays down that an increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld. In view of F. R. 24 increments cannot be stopped unless regular disciplinary proceedings are initiated and the punishment of stoppage of increment is awarded on an employee. It has been held in Anup Singh vs. State of Haryana , 1969, SLR 850 (P & H), that the grant of annual increments unmistakably shows that an employee's service has been satisfactory.

Increment in the Time-Scale — Right to increment whether accrues as a matter of course :—

(i) An increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld (F.R. 24). All duty in a Post on a time-scale counts for increment in the time-scale (F.R. 26(a)). It is clear, therefore, that the right to increment in the time-scale of pay accrues as a matter of course subject to certain exceptions, that is, a probationer is not entitled to increment during the probationary period, unless it is specifically mentioned in the terms of the agreement. If the order does not make a provision to this effect, the Government servant will be entitled to get all the increments falling due to him during the period of probation, only after his confirmation. Therefore, denial of this right to increment earned by a Government servant either in a substantive or temporary capacity (except in the case of a probationer) is a punishment and can only be imposed after the Government servant has been given a reasonable opportunity to represent his case. Of course this right is not protected by the provisions of Article 311(2) of the Constitution.

But it is a valuable right and, therefore, increment cannot be withheld by an issue of an executive order except by way of punishment for which formalities as laid down in the Disciplinary Rules must be observed. As held by the Supreme Court, if the order would result in loss of benefit already earned and accrued, that would be a punishment, vide P. Balakotaiah vs. Union of India , AIR 1958, SC 232.

(ii) If the increment of a Government servant has been provisionally withheld, and his services are thereafter terminated according to the terms of his service, it is clear that the misconduct of the Government servant has not only operated as a motive, but as a foundation by depriving him of his pay earned as increment between the stipulated period, for the termination of his service. This is clearly within the dicta of their Lordships in Dingra's case , vide P.L. Dhingra vs. Union of India , AIR 1958, SC 36 and Jeewan Ram's case , vide Union of India vs. Jeewan Ram , AIR 1958, SC 905. Justice and fair play demand that the Government servant should be given a reasonable opportunity to show cause when an order affects his pay and emoluments to his prejudice, Gurdit Singh vs. State of Punjab , AIR 1960, Punj. 126 ; See also Madan Mohan Prasad vs. State of Bihar , 1973 (4) SCC 225 and B.D. Gupta vs. State of Haryana , AIR 1972, SC 2472.

Grant of increments :—In case the probation period in any particular post is only one year, increment will be granted to an employee after he is declared to have satisfactorily completed his period of probation. In case the period of probation is two years on duty, the first annual increment will be granted after the completion of a service of one year as a matter of course and the second increment will be granted after the probation is declared. In any case if an employee is declared to have satisfactorily completed his period of probation the date on which he draws his increment is the date on which he completed the period of probation satisfactorily but not the date on which proceedings declaring the probation are issued.

Under Rule 26 of the General Rules, in case where the probation of probationer is extended his increment shall be postponed until he completes his probation satisfactorily.

Increments and tests :—A number of departmental tests are usually prescribed in the Special Rules by which a post is governed. It is usually laid down in the Special Rules that the passing of the prescribed tests is a condition precedent for the declaration of probation. Where a person does not pass the prescribed tests within the period of probation, his probation will not be declared under Rule 26 of the General Rules. In cases where a person does not acquire the special qualifications or a pass in prescribed test, as he may be, the period of probation will be extended under the said rules. If the period of probation is extended his increment shall also be postponed until he completes his probation satisfactorily. It may however be pointed out that naturally the tests that are prescribed at the commencement of probation will have to be passed by a probationer to complete his probation and earn his increments. No new departmental test can be prescribed with retrospective effect, O.P. Gupta vs. State of Haryana , 1969, SLR 692 (P&H).

Increment to temporary employees :—Temporary employees are also made eligible to draw increments as per G.O.Ms.No. 5065, G.A. (Ser-A), Dt. 21-4-1961 (appended). It has however been laid down in the said G.O. as follows :

If, however, the passing of any test or tests/completion of any training, acquisition of any qualification is/are prescribed as a condition/conditions for earning the first, second or subsequent increment in respect of regular members belonging to a particular category or grade, the same position holds good in respect of persons appointed or promoted, temporarily to that category or grade under the emergency provisions also.

The effect of this condition in the above G.O. is that where the passing of certain departmental tests or the acquisition of some special qualification is prescribed in the special rules as a condition precedent for the completion of probation such special qualifications should be acquired and the tests passed by the temporary employees as well to claim annual increments. It has already been pointed out that in the case of a regular employee the failure to acquire special qualifications or a pass in the departmental test would render him ineligible for the completion of probation and consequently for drawing increments under General Rule 26. The said G.O. applies the same principle to the temporary employees as well so that the temporary employees may not be placed in a more advantageous position than the regular employees.

Increment during suspension period :—As has already been pointed out an increment can be withheld only under a disciplinary measure after following the procedure prescribed thereof. Otherwise increment has to be granted as a matter of course. As the contract of service of a civil servant continues even though he is under suspension, the increment should be allowed to be drawn. In case where an employee is placed under suspension pending enquiry, his guilt cannot be said to have been proved. It is only after the enquiry is completed and he is found guilty that some punishment will be awarded to him, if an increment falls due during the period of suspension that increment should be granted to him and subsistence allowance should be calculated accordingly. Simply because an employee is under suspension pending enquiry increments cannot be denied to him, Mritunjai Singh vs. State of U.P. , 1971 (2) SLR 523 (All.); AIR 1971, All. 214.

In Kansingh vs. State of Rajasthan , 1989 (4) SLR 763, the Rajasthan High Court held that during suspension the contract of service still subsists and the employee is entitled to annual grade increments as a matter of course. If a Government servant who is suspended is denied the annual grade increments it will amount to a penalty without any determination of his guilt.

On reinstatement :—Where an order of termination is quashed and the employee is reinstated he is not only entitled for the salary for the period of termination but he is also entitled to increments as well, Ishverlal vs. Director of Accounts , 1989 (7) SLR 383.

Incremental arrears — No limitation :—Where arrears of increments are due the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the same have to be paid and the plea of limitation should not be urged before the Court. Taking that view,

in Ram Mehar vs. State of Haryana , 1989 (4) SLR 290, the Court observed as follows at page 292 :

The other claim in the writ petition relates to payment of arrears of salary on account of increments allowed for the years 1973, 1974 and 1975 upto January 1, 1978 as thereafter the petitioner was given benefit of the increments along with the pay. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Madras Port Trust vs. Hymanshu International , 1979 (1) SLR 757 wherein it was observed as under :

The plea of limitation based on this section is one which the Court always looks upon with disfavour and it is unfortunate that a public authority like the Port Trust should, in all morality and justice, take up such a plea to defeat a just claim of the citizen. It is high time that Government and public authorities adopt the practice of not replying upon technical plea for the purpose of defeating legitimate claims of citizens and do what is fair and just to citizens. Of course, if a Government or a public authority takes up a technical plea, the Court has to decide it and if the plea is well-founded, it has to be upheld by the Court, but what we feel is that such a plea should not ordinarily be taken up by a Government or a public authority, unless of course the claim is not well founded and by reason of delay in filing it, the evidence for the purpose of resisting such a claim has become unavailable.

In the present case Ram Mehar is a petty official of the department. In routine, he earned the increments which were sanctioned. It is immaterial whether the same were sanctioned by the Chief Medical Officer, Rohtak and not by Chief Medical Officer, Sonepat as was claimed. This is a case where the claim is otherwise admitted but is being denied to the petitioner on the technical ground of limitation. The petitioner had worked during the said period and he should not be deprived of his salary or part thereof for the said period.

Premature Increments during Strike Period — Withdrawal — Validity :—In a case an advance increment was granted to employees who attended to their work during strike period. Subsequently, the Government changed its mind and issued an order discontinuing the advance increments already granted. It has been held by the Kerala High Court in that connection that the order of the Government is one having civil consequences and such an order could not be passed by the Government without giving an opportunity to the persons likely to be affected by that order.

An authority may grant a premature increment to a Government servant on a time-scale of pay, if it has power to create post in the same cadre on the time-scale of pay.

If a premature increment has been validly given to a Government servant, he will also be entitled to receive his pay enhanced to the next stage in the time-scale. Appukuttan Nair vs. State of Kerala , 1969, SLR 469 (Ker.).

Limitation :—An increment becomes due to an employee on the date on which it accrues to him and every month thereafter. Under Article 7 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the period of limitation for claiming the increments is three years before the filing of the suit. See Ghouse Mohiuddin vs. State of A.P. , 1971 (1) SLR 163 (A.P.) It may however be pointed out that the Limitation Act applies only where an employee wants to recover his incremental arrears through a Court of law and he cannot get a decree for arrears falling beyond three years and two months from the date of the filing of the suit. But where increments have rightly become due to him and were not granted to him due to administrative delays, the fact that the increments have become time-barred and the employee cannot recover the arrears through Court should not be taken advantage of by the Government to deny the arrears. In cases where amounts are due justly and rightly to the employees, Government should not take the plea of limitation to deny such dues. See in this connection Srivastava vs. Union of India , AIR 1974, SC 338 and Madras Port Trust vs. Hymanshu International , AIR 1979, SC 1144. As a model employer, naturally the Government servants expect that their legitimate dues will be paid to them by the Government and usually the Government employees never take recourse to Courts of law for recovering their legitimate dues.

Increment — Withholding of Article 311(2) of the Constitution not attracted :—Withholding of increment is a penalty. If proper notice to meet the charges levelled against the Government servant has in fact been given, then if the proposed action taken against him is merely of withholding of increment he would not be entitled to the right conferred by Article 311 (2) of the Constitution, vide Gangaram Bhatia vs. Union of India , AIR 1958, Punj. 643. See Heading 'Withholding of increments'.

Increment — Right to earn as matter of course unless withheld by way of penalty :—Under F.R. 24 an ordinary increment is drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld by way of penalty. An increment may be withheld from the pay of a Government servant by the Central Government or by any authority to whom the Central Government may delegate the power if his conduct has not been good or his work has not been satisfactory. In ordering withholding of increments in pay of a Government servant, the withholding authority shall state the period for which it is withheld and whether the postponement shall have the effect of postponing future increments, vide Jwala Prasad vs. State of Bihar , 1973 (1) SLR 546; Brahm Dev vs. Union of India , 1974 (1) SLR 680 ; 1973, SLJ 961.

Increment — Whether can be withheld during the pendency of a Departmental proceeding :—Increment is earned as a matter of course and the penalty of withholding of increment could be imposed only on good and sufficient cause and increment cannot be withheld merely because of the pendency of certain proceedings against a public servant, vide Bhagwan Swarup vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi , 1977, SLJ 160.

Increment — Stoppage of - Without proper authority Invalid :—Where by Government circular issued by the order of the Governor granting two increments to a teacher who had successfully completed the training course, no distinction was made between Headmasters and other teachers, and when under a subsequent order issued by the Assistant Secretary without any authority of the Governor, the Managing Committee stopped the increments of the Headmasters and claimed refund from them it was held that the subsequent circular could not curtail or modify the rights to which the Headmasters and other teachers were equally entitled, and the claim for refund was not maintainable, vide Bhabatosh Pati vs. State of West Bengal , 1978 (2) SLR 326 (329) (Cal.).

Recovery of wrong payments :—Where an increment is sanctioned and amounts paid due to an administrative error, the administrative authorities have inherent right to rectify their own mistakes. G. Hanumantha Rao vs. Asst. Controller of Customs , 1989 (7) SLR 388.

Examinations – Pass in Account Test for Subordinate Officers, Part-I and II as equivalent with a pass in Account Test for Executive Officers.

( G.O.Ms. No. 1799, General Administration (Ser.A) Dept., Dt. 7-10-1965 )

Ref. :—From the A.P. Public Service Commission Letter No.1223-B/65, dated 18-06-1965.

Order :—The Government direct that Government Servants who have passed Account Test for Subordinate Officers, Part-I and II shall be exempt from passing Account Tests for Executive Officers where such test is prescribed in the Special Rules concerned.

Departments of Secretariat are requested to amend the provisions in Special Rules with which they are concerned to the above effect.