SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1098

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, J.
R.Janarthanam - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, School Education Department and ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.23786 of 2019
Decided On : 28-11-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.R.Sreedharan
For the Respondent: Mr.S.Yashwanth, Additional Government Pleader

The concept of granting selection grade and special grade should not be tampered with and that teachers are either eligible for promotion or for Selection/Special Grade, not both.

Headnote:

Mandamus - School Education - G.O.Ms.No.210, School Education (G1) Department, dated 14.08.2009 - G.O. Ms. No. 666 Finance (Pay Commission) dated 27.06.1089, G.O. Ms. No. 304 Finance (Pay Commission) Department dated 28.03.1990, G.O. Ms. No. 1381 Education Department dated 05.10.1990, G.O.Ms.No. 300 Education, Science and Technology Department dated 07.04.1994, G.O. Ms. No. 216 Finance (Pay Commission) Department dated 22.03.1993, G.O. Ms. No. 207 School Education (G2) Department dated 30.09.2008, G.O. Ms. No. 190 School Education (G1) Department dated 12.07.2010, G.O. Ms.No. 230 School Education (G1) Department dated 10.08.2010, G.O. Ms. No. 146 School Education (G1) Department dated 19.06.2012 - The court discussed various government orders related to the concept of selection/special grade, the calculation of service for granting selection/special grade, and the issue of illegal claims for selection/special grade after promotion. The court emphasized that the concept of granting selection grade and special grade should not be tampered with and that teachers are either eligible for promotion or for Selection/Special Grade, not both.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought the extension of benefits of G.O.Ms.No.210, School Education (G1) Department, dated 14.08.2009 and payment of revised pension and other arrears. The petitioner claimed entitlement to Selection Grade of Pay in the post of Middle School Headmaster based on the Fifth Pay Commission, which was implemented from 01.06.1988. The court found that the petitioner did not pursue the matter vigilantly during the relevant time and rejected the claim on the ground of delay and latches.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's claim for the benefits was belated and could not be entertained. The court also emphasized that the concept of granting selection grade and special grade should not be tampered with and that teachers are either eligible for promotion or for Selection/Special Grade, not both.

Issues: The issues included the petitioner's entitlement to the benefits of G.O.Ms.No.210, School Education (G1) Department, dated 14.08.2009, the calculation of service for granting selection/special grade, and the legality of the petitioner's claim for selection grade/special grade after promotion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's claim for the benefits was belated and could not be entertained. The court also emphasized that the concept of granting selection grade and special grade should not be tampered with and that teachers are either eligible for promotion or for Selection/Special Grade, not both.

Final Decision: The Writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

ORDER :

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to extend the benefits of G.O.Ms.No.210, School Education (G1) Department, dated 14.08.2009 in light of the Division Bench of this Court order in W.A.No.73/2019 dated 26.03.2019 and pay all revised pension and other arrears.

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondent to extend the benefits if G.O.Ms.No.210, School Education (G1) Department, dated 14.08.2009 in light of the Division Bench of this Court order in W.A.No.73/2019 dated 26.03.2019 and pay all revised pension and other arrears to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner states that he was initially appointed to the post of Special Teacher (P.E.T) on 03.12.1971. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of B.T. Assistant on 05.07.1997 and subsequently, he was again promoted to the post of Middle School Headmaster on 05.07.1994. Finally, the petitioner served in the post of Additional Elementary Educational Officer and retired from service after reaching the age of superannuation on 30.04.2003.

3. The petitioner states that he is entitled for Selection Grade of Pay in the post of Middle School Headmaster by extending the benefit of G.O.(Ms) No.210, School Education Department, dated 14.08.2009. As far as the petitioner is concerned, the benefit claimed by the petitioner is relating to the Fifth Pay Commission, which was implemented with effect from 01.06.1988. The writ petition itself is filed in the year 2019 after several years. Thus, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has not pursued the matter vigilantly during the relevant point of time. Therefore, such belated claims cannot be entertained.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the petitioner was pursuing the matter and they filed writ petition on earlier occasion.

5. Be that as it may, even in case, the petitioner pursued the matter, this Court is of an opinion that the issues raised by the petitioners are no more res integra.

6. This Court has elaborately considered all the Government Orders in this subject and passed an order on 25.01.2022 in W.P.(MD) Nos. 3186 and 3187 of 2016.

7. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents made a submission that the facts in the writ petitions on hand as well as the facts decided by this Court in W.P.(MD) Nos.3186 and 3187 of 2016 are identical.

8. For better appreciation, the relevant paragraphs of the order dated 25.01.2022 are extracted herein below:-

    “7. The concept of selection/special grade is that the government employees are entitled to “selection grade” if the person is stagnating is the same post without promotion for 10 years and entitled to “special grade” if the person is stagnating is the same post without promotion for 20 years. The G.O. Ms. No. 666 Finance (Pay Commission) dated 27.06.1089 was issued cancelling the selection/special grade. Thereafter the scheme of granting selection/special grade was reintroduced vide G.O. Ms. No. 304 Finance (Pay Commission) Department dated 28.03.1990. In partial modification in paragraph 9 of the G.O. 666, the G.O. 304 was issued granting the selection/special grade.

8. In Education Department prior to 01.06.1988 the post of Secondary Grade Teacher and Primary School Headmaster in Government Schools and Panchayat Union Schools are interchangeable and considered as same post. The grade pay of the Secondary Grade Teacher and the grade pay of the Primary School Headmaster are same, with an additional special pay to the Headmaster. After 01.06.1988 the post of Headmaster is a promotion post and in V pay Commission the Headmaster were paid Rs. 1400-2600 without special pay and the Secondary Grade Teacher were paid 1200-2040. The teachers who had worked in the Panchayat Schools/Government Schools in Secondary Grade Post were allowed to serve as Headmaster of Primary School with extra allo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top