Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.
P. Santhi – Appellant
Versus
The Government of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Secretary to Government P & AR Department, Fort St. George, Chennai & Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 18109 of 2017 & W.M.P. No. 19652 of 2017
Decided On : 22-08-2023
Pay Fixation - Government Order No.25 P & AR Department dated 23.03.2015 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the order of the respondents and to direct the respondents to step up the petitioner's pay to the level of his junior and fix the same at Rs.22,280 as per G.O.Ms. No.25P and AR Department dated 23.3.2015.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Government Order No.25 P & AR Department dated 23.03.2015 applies to rectify the anomaly where a senior got promotion before moving to Selection Grade in the lower post and the junior got promotion after moving to Selection Grade. The court held that the petitioner's pay should be fixed equal to the pay of the junior in the higher post.
Issues: The main issue was the interpretation of G.O.Ms.No.25 P & AR Department dated 23.03.2015 and whether the petitioner's pay should be stepped up to the level of his junior.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the Government Order No.25 P & AR Department dated 23.03.2015, which directed that in cases of pay anomaly, the pay of seniors should be fixed in the higher post equal to the pay of the junior in the higher post.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to issue necessary proceedings within four months to step up the petitioner's pay. The first respondent was deleted as a party in the writ petition.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd and 4th respondents respectively issued in Na.Ka. No.16907/ E1/2016 dated 11.8.2016 and in O.M.No.680/A3/2016 dated 8.3.2016 and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to step up the petitioners pay to the level of his junior and fix the same at Rs.22,280/- as on 12.10.2009 as per G.O.Ms. No.25P and AR Department dated 23.3.2015 and grant arrears of pay and other consequential benefits.)
1. Writ petition has been filed in the nature of a certiorarified mandamus seeking records relating to the order of third and fourth respondents dated 11.08.2016 and 08.03.2016 respectively and to quash the same and issue a direction to the respondents to step-up the pay of the petitioner to the level of his junior and fix the same at Rs.22280/- as on 12.10.2009 and grant arrears of pay and other consequential benefits.
2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it had been stated by the petitioner that he joined as Secondary Grade Teacher on 08.07.1988 at Panchayat Union Elementary School, Singiliyan Combai, Namagiripattai Panchayat Union, Namakkal. The petitioner was transferred to Mohanur Panchayat Union, Namakkal District on 30.01.1990. The petitioner further was promoted as Primary School Headmaster and posted at Panchayat Union Primary School at Rasipalayam on 14.09.2004. The pay of the post in the Primary School Headmaster was fixed at Rs.6200/- in the time scale of Rs.5300 – 150 – 8300, which is ordinary grade scale of pay for Primary School Headmaster as per the pre-revised scale of pay, which was introduced with effect from 01.01.1996 by the Government of Tamil Nadu.
3. The petitioner had obtained higher qualification as B.Litt, M.A., and M.Ed. The petitioner was eligible to get Selection Grade scale of pay in the post of Primary School Headmaster on 08.07.2008. The petitioner was also granted Selection Grade pay in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher on 11.07.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as B.Ed Middle School Headmaster on 20.12.2007. This promotion was before the grant of further grade as Secondary Grade Teacher which the petitioner would have been entitled to. The pay in the post of Middle School Headmaster was fixed at Rs.7300/- in the scale of pay of Rs.5900 – 200 – 9900 in the pre-revised scale of pay introduced with effect from 01.01.1996. Thereafter, under G.O.Ms.No.234, Finance (Pay Commission) dated 01.06.2009, the concept of grade was introduced.
4. The petitioner claims that had he continued as Primary School Headmaster without being promoted, he would have obtained Special Grade on 08.07.2008 in the pay band of Rs.15600 – 38100 + 5400 GP. But the petitioner was promoted prior to that fixation of that particular pay itself and, therefore, the pay was fixed at Rs. 9300 – 34900 + 4500 GP, which is the ordinary grade scale in the promotional post.
5. By the promotion, the petitioner claims that there was loss in emoluments. Had the petitioner been promoted after being granted Special Grade, then in the promotional post, he would have got a higher scale in accordance with the Special Grade of pay which would have drawn had he completed ten years of service in the ordinary scale of pay.
6. Though it could be contended that promotion as recognition of services of the petitioner, actually by that promotion, the petitioner had suffered a slight loss of emoluments. The petitioner is deeply aggrieved by a junior, who was also comparatively of the same experience and who had been granted the promotion as Middle School Headmaster after being granted Selection Grade pay in the earlier post, namely Primary School Headmaster.
7. Since the junior / S.Nagalakshmi was promoted after she had been granted Selection Grade Pay while serving as Primary School Headmistress, she was able to get a higher pay compared to that the
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the application and interpretation of Government Order No.25 P & AR Department dated 23.03.2015 to rectify pay anomalies between seniors and ju....
The main legal point established is that teachers are entitled to pay parity with their juniors, irrespective of the union of initial appointment and subsequent transfer.
The court established that seniority must be respected in pay fixation, and government orders mandating pay rectification should be implemented without regard to union differences.
The entitlement to stepping up of pay arises only when the junior is working in the same cadre as the senior, and without specific rules for rectifying pay discrepancies, interference on the grounds ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that entitlement to selection grade and special grade is subject to completion of requisite years of service, and recovery orders issued within one....
Point of Law : Reasoning of the High Court was erroneous and the appellant No.1 was also entitled to the same benefits of pay parity with Shri Shori as has been granted to the appellant No.2
The delay in approaching the court does not affect the claim for pay protection and higher pension, and the recurring cause of action in matters of pay scale and consequential pension justifies the r....
Pay protection under Rule 22B FR mandatory on promotion; prevents salary reduction; 10 years' service qualifies Selection Grade pension.
The main legal point established is the inapplicability of G.O.Ms.No.216 to the petitioner due to delay and laches, and the determination that the petitioner, working in a private aided school, was o....
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
