Back
2015 Supreme(Mad) 1647
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. RAJA, J.
M. Joseph Charles – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government Department of School Education, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. No. 33170 of 2007
Decided On : 19-03-2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S.M. Edward Stanley, Advocate.
For the Respondents: K.V. Dhanapalan, Additional Government Pleader.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the eligibility for incentive increments for educational qualifications is determined by the relevant Government Orders, and the court's decision is based on the interpretation and application of these legal provisions.
Headnote:
Incentive Increments - Educational Qualification - G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department dated 10.1.69, G.O.Ms.No.1023, Education, Science & Technology Department dated 9.12.93 - The court held that the petitioner is entitled to two advance increments for each of the B.Ed., and M.Ed., degrees as per the Government Orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Secondary Grade Teacher, acquired B.Com., B.Ed., and M.Ed. degrees and was granted incentive increments. However, the respondents ordered the recovery of the incentive increments, citing that the petitioner's qualifications were not recognized in the syllabus of primary schools.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner is entitled to the incentive increments for acquiring B.Ed. and M.Ed. degrees as per the Government Orders. The impugned orders for recovery were set aside, and the writ petition was allowed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner is eligible for the incentive increments for his educational qualifications, considering the syllabus of primary schools.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department dated 10.1.69 and G.O.Ms.No.1023, Education, Science & Technology Department dated 9.12.93 to determine the eligibility of the petitioner for incentive increments. It held that the petitioner is entitled to the incentive increments for acquiring B.Ed. and M.Ed. degrees as per the Government Orders.
Final Decision: The impugned orders were set aside, and the writ petition was allowed. The petitioner was held entitled to the two advance increments for each of the B.Ed., and M.Ed., degrees.
1. This writ petition has been filed by Mr.M.Joseph Charles challenging the impugned order of recovery dated 6.6.2006 issued by the District Elementary Educational Officer, Erode, the third respondent herein and the consequential proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1303/06/A1 issued by the Additional Elementary Educational Officer, the fourth respondent herein dated 17.11.06, to quash the same so far as the petitioner is concerned with a consequential direction to the respondents to continue to pay the last drawn salary with incentive increments for higher educational qualification acquired by him with all other attendant and monetary benefits.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, having passed the Diploma in Teacher Education in the year 1992, registered his name in the employment exchange for getting appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher. Thereafter, he appeared in the competitive examination and got selected for appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher on 27.7.95 in the Panchayat Union Elementary School, Mettuvalvu, Kunnathur, Uthukuli Union in Erode District. Even prior to that, he had passed B.Com. degree in the year 1986. However, after joining the post of Secondary Grade Teacher on 31.7.95, he has again joined the B.Ed. Degree course conducted by Annamalai University through correspondence course during 1995-96 with the permission granted by the Assistant Educational Officer, Uthukuli on 25.9.95. Subsequently, the District Elementary Educational Officer, Erode also permitted him to take teaching practice in his proceedings dated 29.7.97 in O.Mu.No.11254/97/B3. That apart, when the petitioner also passed B.Ed. Degree course in the year 1998, the same was also approved by the third respondent, who ratified the higher educational qualification in his proceedings dated 13.2.2001 bearing O.Mu.No.61/A3/2001. The further case of the petitioner is that after passing the B.Ed., course, he became a B.Com., B.Ed., Secondary Grade Teacher. Thereafter, he has also studied M.Ed., degree course with the permission granted by the third respondent and he also passed the M.Ed., degree course in May, 2000. Therefore, the petitioner, having become a qualified Secondary Grade Teacher with higher educational qualification of B.Com.,M.Ed., is eligible to get the incentive increments for acquiring such higher educational qualification as per the rules and regulations of the Government. In view of that, he made a representation to the fourth respondent to sanction the incentive increments for acquiring the higher educational qualification on 2.1.2002. The Additional Elementary Educational Officer, Uthukkuli, accepting his request, had sanctioned the two incentive increments, namely, four increments to him. Explaining further, the learned counsel submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department dated 10.1.69, he was sanctioned with the incentive increments for acquiring higher educational qualification in Na.Ka.No.22/02/A1 dated 19.7.2002. Again for having acquired M.Ed., degree, the fourth respondent again sanctioned two more incentive increments, namely, four increments from the next day of the last examination of M.Ed. Degree. The first incentive increment was sanctioned with effect from 30.1.98 for B.Com./B.Ed., with an increase of Rs.250/- with basic pay. Again the second incentive increment was also sanctioned with effect from 22.5.2000 for M.Ed., qualification with an increase of Rs.250/- with basic pay and he was also disbursed with all pending arrears and his salary was also refixed from 30.1.98 and once again his salary was refixed from 22.5.2000.
3. Under this background, the grievance of the petitioner is that the third respondent raised an objection through the annual inspection for the year 2005-06. In paragraph-7 of the inspection report dated 6.6.2006, it has been stated that the incentive incremen
