Antony Dominic, J.
The petitioner was the applicant in O.A.No.2150 of 2013 before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal. She was aggrieved by Annexures A6 and A7, whereby the time bound higher grades given to her reckoning her services as Work Superintendent in the Agricultural Department was reviewed. The Tribunal upheld those orders and disposed of O.A. giving the petitioner liberty to move the Government for exonerating her from the recovery of excess amount already received by her. It is aggrieved by this order, this original petition is filed.
2. We heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. On facts we notice that the petitioner joined initially as a Work Superintendent in the Agricultural Department on 21.4.1988.
O.P.(KAT)No.365 OF 2014 : 2 :
Subsequently, she got recruited through Public Service Commission and accordingly joined the Irrigation Department as Third Grade Overseer on 21.1.1992. She was given the benefit of time bound higher grade promotions as provided in the 7th Pay Commission report. She was given the first, second and third time bound higher grades in 1998, 2006 and 2011 respectively. Subsequently, an audit objection was raised on the basis that for granting time bound higher grades to the petitioner, her service in the Agricultural Department could not have been reckoned. That was sustained in Annexures A6 and A7. It was in these circumstances, the O.A. was filed.
4. Contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that Ext.P2 is the Government Order, dated 25.11.1998 implementing the time bound higher grades. According to learned counsel, first, second and third time bound higher grades are to be given on completion of 10 years, 18 years and 23 years in the entry post, and also the entry post and the first regular promotion post. Referring to Clause 11 of this Government Order, the learned counsel contended that the term 'entry post' is defined as the post which an employee is O.P.(KAT)No.365 OF 2014 : 3 :
initially appointed in Government service by direct recruitment by the competent authority. According to the learned counsel, these provisions of Ext.P2 demonstrates that the entry post is the post in which the Government servant initially enters the Government service and that therefore, in so far as the petitioner is concerned, her entry post is the post in the Agricultural Department, entitling her to reckon that service also for determining her eligibility for time bound higher grades.
5. We are unable to agree. We have already seen the eligibility for time bound higher grade commences only from the entry post. Entry post is the post to which an employee is initially appointed in the Government service. There is nothing in this Ext.P2 order which says that the entry post can be the post in which the Government servant was initially appointed in any other department. In the absence of any such prescription, the term entry post should be understood as the post in the department in which the Government servant has entered into service. If that be so, the petitioner having entered the Irrigation Department in 1992, her entry post in that department is the post of Third Grade Overseer. Consequently, her eligibility for time bound O.P.(KAT)No.365 OF 2014 : 4 :
higher grade has to be reckoned from 1992 when she entered the Irrigation Department. If that be so, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be said to be erroneous. We do not see any reason to interfere with the order.
6. It is clarified that the interim order of the Tribunal and the direction of the Tribunal giving the petitioner liberty to move the Government for waiver of the liability to refund any amount will remain unaffected by this judgment.
Original petition is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge jes ANIL K. NARENDRAN, Judge