Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. SRIMATHY, J.
R. Latha Banu - Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P.(MD). Nos. 6837, 3838, 5893 to 5897 & 9815 of 2018 & 22271 to 22277 of 2017 & W.M.P.(MD).Nos. 3551 to 3556, 3681, 5767 to 5776, 6566 to 6569, 7809 to 7812, 9010 & 9011 of 2018 & 18575 to 18581 of 2017
Decided On : 02-06-2022
Incentive Increment - Teacher Promotion - G.O.Ms.No.42, G.O.Ms.No.107, G.O.Ms.No.1297 - The court discussed the legal provisions of G.O.Ms.No.42, G.O.Ms.No.107, and G.O.Ms.No.1297, which govern the grant of incentive increments for acquiring higher qualifications for teachers. The court interpreted these provisions to determine the eligibility of the petitioner for incentive increments for acquiring a B.Ed. degree after promotion to the post of Middle School Headmaster. The court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to incentive increments for the B.Ed. degree based on the legal framework provided by the aforementioned government orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, sought incentive increments for acquiring a B.Ed. degree after being promoted to the post of Middle School Headmaster. The respondents denied the incentive increments based on government orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was not entitled to incentive increments for the B.Ed. degree as per the relevant government orders. The court remitted the cases to the Director of Elementary Education for further scrutiny and consideration in accordance with the law.
Issues: The issues involved in the case revolved around the eligibility of the petitioner for incentive increments for acquiring a B.Ed. degree after promotion to the post of Middle School Headmaster.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the legal provisions in G.O.Ms.No.42, G.O.Ms.No.107, and G.O.Ms.No.1297, which determined that the petitioner was not entitled to incentive increments for the B.Ed. degree as per the government orders.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, remitted the cases to the Director of Elementary Education for further scrutiny, and ordered that the claim of the petitioner be considered in accordance with the law.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in Letter No. 3702/Tho.Ka1(2)/2017, dated 10.10.2017 and the consequential order of recovery issued by the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.30/A4/2018, dated 19.01.2018 and to quash the same and consequently, directing the respondents to continue to pay incentive increment to the petitioner for B.Ed., Degree with revision scale of pay with reference to recommendations of VII Pay Commission.)
1.The issues involved in these writ petitions are one and the same, hence they are taken up together, heard and disposed of by this common order.
2. The brief facts of the case as stated in W.P.(MD).No.6837 of 2018 is that the writ petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in Elementary Education Department on 19.08.1988. The petitioner acquired qualification of B.Lit., in the year 2002 based on the said qualification the petitioner was promoted as Primary School Headmaster on 30.12.2004, then promoted as Tamil Pandit on 05.11.2007. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted as Middle School Headmaster on 02.06.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner acquired the qualification of B.Ed., degree in the year 2010. The petitioner was granted incentive increment for having acquired B.Ed., Degree as per G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department, dated 10.01.1969. Thereafter the first respondent has issued a Government Letter dated 10.10.2017 by stating that the Teacher appointed as Tamil Pandit based on B.Lit., qualification, thereafter, promoted to the post of Middle School Headmaster is not entitled for any incentive increment for qualifying B.Ed. Degree. The first respondent's order was directed to be implemented by the second respondent vide his communication dated 08.11.2017. Consequently, the fourth respondent issued order of recovery, dated 19.01.2018, thereby cancelling the order of sanctioning incentive increment for acquiring B.Ed., degree and also the second respondent, dated 08.11.2017, thereby implemented the first respondent's order.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that the Secondary Grade Teacher on acquiring B.Lit., degree is eligible to be promoted as Primary School Headmaster or Tamil Pandit or B.T. Assistant (Tamil) as well as to the post of Middle School Headmaster. Whenever B.Ed. Degree is acquired, it is considered as additional qualification for the Teacher who were promoted based on the B.Lit., degree and he is eligible for the grant of incentive increment. As per the orders passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 20.01.1976, it is directed that the Tamil Pandit Grade - I, who is not required to possess B.T. for initial appointment and Grade - II Tamil Pandit, to be allowed two increments as incentive increments for acquiring qualification of B.Lit., and B.Ed., degree. Accordingly, the Tamil Pandit is eligible for grant of incentive increment for acquiring qualification of B.Ed. The Secondary Grade Teacher qualified with B.Lit., is also eligible for promotion to the post of Middle School Headmaster as per G.O.Ms.No.1297, dated 21.07.1979, in which event the B.Ed., qualification acquired by the petitioner working in the post of Middle School Headmaster become an additional qualification, thereby he was made eligible for incentive increment on par with the Tamil Pandit. As clarified by the proceedings of Director of Elementary Education issued in O.Mu.No.15623/B19/90/ dated 07.06.1991. Accordingly, when B.Lit., being eligible to the promotion to the post of Tamil Pandit as well as to the post of Middle School Headmaster, a Teacher promoted to the post of Tamil Pandit or Middle School Headmaster acquired B.Ed., degree, which is additional qualification, is granted incentive increment for the same. However, the respondent vide proceedings, dated 10.10.2017, has declined to grant incentive increment for acquiring B.
AI
Incentive increment is granted only for higher qualifications and not for basic qualifications. The cancellation of incentive increments for all higher qualifications as per G.O.Ms.No.37 Personnel Ad....
The acquisition of a B.Ed. degree is not an additional qualification for incentive increment purposes, as it is equivalent to existing minimum qualifications for promotion.
Incentive increment is a concession granted to encourage teachers to acquire higher educational qualifications relevant to the subject they teach, and recovery of incentive increment after more than ....
Payment of incentive increments based on higher qualifications gained should not be reclaimed unless based on misrepresentation or fraud.
Teachers are entitled to incentive increments for higher qualifications relevant to the subjects they teach, as established by G.O. provisions, despite contrary departmental letters.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a teacher is entitled to get two incentive increments in his entire service and that the grant of third incentive increment is impermissible.
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
