IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
C. Nandhakumar - Appellant
Versus
The Director of School Education, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. No. 1492 of 2015 & M.P. No. 1 of 2015
Decided On : 25-07-2022
Incentive Increment - Teachers - G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department dated 10.01.1969, G.O.Ms.No.107, Education Department, dated 20.01.1976, G.O.Ms.No.747, Finance(Pay Cell) Department dated 18th August 1986, G.O.Ms.No.624, Education (E2) Department dated 13.07.1992, G.O.Ms.No.1023, Education, Science and Technology Department dated 09.12.1993, G.O.Ms.No.1024, Education, Science and Technology Department dated 09.12.1993, G.O.Ms.No.1170, Education, Science & Technology Department dated 20.12.1993, G.O.Ms.No.324, Education, Science and Technology Department(E2) dated 25.04.1995, G.O.Ms.No.194, School Education(E2) Department dated 10.10.2006, G.O.Ms.No.285, School Education Department dated 28.11.2007 - The court discussed the various government orders and judgments related to the grant of incentive increments to teachers. The court emphasized that a teacher is entitled to get two incentive increments in his entire service and that the grant of third incentive increment is impermissible. The court highlighted the need for consolidated instructions to be issued by the government to avoid confusion and ensure uniform implementation of the scheme.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, sought a writ of mandamus to sanction incentive increment with arrears of salary and interest based on the representation submitted by the petitioner. The court settled the issue of grant of incentives to teachers and discussed various government orders and judgments related to the grant of incentive increments to teachers.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that a teacher is entitled to get two incentive increments in his entire service and that the grant of third incentive increment is impermissible. The court emphasized the need for consolidated instructions to be issued by the government to ensure uniform implementation of the scheme.
Issues: The issues revolved around the entitlement of teachers to incentive increments and the interpretation of various government orders and judgments related to the grant of incentive increments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a teacher is entitled to get two incentive increments in his entire service and that the grant of third incentive increment is impermissible. The court emphasized the need for consolidated instructions to be issued by the government to ensure uniform implementation of the scheme.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the court emphasized the need for consolidated instructions to be issued by the government to ensure uniform implementation of the scheme.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to sanction incentive increment for the petitioner with effect from the date of promotion to the post of PG Assistant for acquiring M.Phil., degree based on the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 07.10.2014 with arrears of salary with interest, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.)
1. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Madras High Court, settled the issue in the matter of grant of incentives to the Teachers across the State of Tamil Nadu. Accordingly, a Teacher is eligible to get two incentive increment in entire service. The third incentive for acquiring additional qualification is impermissible with reference to the Government Orders in force. The order of the Division Bench as well as the Government Orders and other orders are all adjudicated by this Court elaborately in W.P.Nos.56 to 58 of 2018 dated 29.08.2018. The relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
“3. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents states that as per G.O.Ms.No.107 Education Department dated 20.01.1976, the writ petitioners are not entitled for any further increments. This Court is of an opinion that a teacher on acquisition of higher qualifications is entitled for two incentive increments amounting to four increments in as per the scheme. The grant of incentive increments is required to be granted on all the teachers on acquisition of higher educational qualification. The issue in this regard has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.6408 of 2014 dated 20.08.2018, and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder.
“3. The entire case of the writ petitioner rest on the ground that the similarly placed persons, who served in the promotional cadre of P.G.Assistant were sanctioned with the third incentive increment on acquisition of higher qualification of M.Phil., Degree. Thus, the same benefit is to be extended to the writ petitioner also.
4. However, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner raised certain questions in respect of grant of incentive increment for the Teachers, who are working in Education Department. Thus, this Court has to deal with those Government orders and the judgments referred for the purpose of regulating these incentive increments to be granted to the Teachers, who are working in Education Department and acquiring additional qualifications for the purpose of getting these incentive increments.
5. The very basis for grant of incentive increment is to encourage the school teachers to acquire additional qualification, which would be useful for the students and for the improvement of the Education System in our great Nation. The Government, at the first instance, issued G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department dated 10th January 1969, stating that “the Government have already accepted in principle that incentive payments and awards should be given to the teachers in Schools who acquire higher educational qualifications”. Accordingly, the proposal of the Director of School Education has been accepted and the eligibility criteria also has been fixed in the above Government orders. However, the original order did not contain several other Degrees and circumstances, which aroused subsequently on account of various developments in the Education Department. The prevailing situation in the year 1969 was considered and the Government order was passed. However, the concept of grant of incentive increment continued even thereafter in respect of the acquisition of additional higher qualifications by the Teachers. In continuation of the said G.O.Ms.No.42, Education Department, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.107, Education Department, dated 20.01.1976. In the said G.O., the benefit of the incentive increments were granted to the Tamil Pandits also.
6. The Government issued L
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.
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 the eligibility for incentive increments based on additional qualifications, the permissibility of recovery, and the importance of performance-base....
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 ....
Lack of prior permission does not bar incentive increments for higher qualifications acquired before 2020 G.O. cancellation.
The judgment established the conditions under which recovery of incentive increments was permissible, emphasizing the need for performance-based review of incentive increments for Teachers.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.