Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
R. Sooriyakumari
Versus
The Director of School Education Chennai & Another
W.P.No.34997 of 2006
Decided On : 03-02-2012
Mandamus - Pay Discrepancy - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking mandamus for stepping up pay to match junior employee's pay due to higher qualification incentives.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to step up their pay to be at par with their junior colleague, citing a pay anomaly arising from the junior's promotion and incentives for higher qualifications.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the writ to be misconceived as the junior's higher pay was due to acquiring higher qualifications, not due to pay scale revision, and thus the law for stepping up senior salary did not apply.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner's pay should be stepped up to match the junior employee's pay due to a perceived anomaly.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the law for stepping up senior salary to match the junior's did not apply as the junior's higher pay was due to acquiring higher qualifications, not due to pay scale revision.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed for being without merit, and no costs were awarded.
1. Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, for stepping up his pay to be at par with her junior S.Arumugam with effect from 14.09.189 with all consequential monetary benefits.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that anomaly of junior drawing more pay than the senior had arisen on 14.09.1989, in view of the promotion of S.Arumugam on 14.09.1989 and on account of sanction of two incentive increments, for acquiring higher qualification of M.A.
3. The averments made in the petition for removal of anomaly reads as under:
(h) The applicant humbly submits that the above anomaly of 'Junior drawing more pay than senior' as stated above, had arisen on 14.9.1989, consequent on the promotion of Thiru S.Arumugam, on that date and on account of sanction of two incentive increments with effect from 21.1.1990 for passing B.Litt Degree qualification and another two increments with effect from 25.9.1991 for acquiring M.A.Degree qualification. Thus, it may be seen that he has been drawing lesser pay than his junior from 14.9.1989 onwards and consequently, she has been exposed to grave prejudice, monetary loss, hardship and mental agony. She is on the verge of retirement and hence, it is just and necessary that her pay is stepped up on par with her junior from 14.9.1989."
4. On consideration, I find that this writ is totally misconceived as the Junior is not being paid higher pay scale, on account of fixation of pay in view of the revision of pay scale or for any other reason, but because of acquiring higher qualification, which entitled special increments. The law with regard to stepping up of senior salary to match the junior, has no application to the facts of the present case.
5. Consequently, the writ petition being without any merits is ordered to be dismissed. No costs.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
