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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 73100

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr. G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
K.Jayanthi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Writ Petition | WMP.No.50047 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr.M.Jaikumar
For the Respondents: Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru, Spl.GP For R.1 to R.5

Payment of incentive increments based on higher qualifications gained should not be reclaimed unless based on misrepresentation or fraud.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition filed challenging the cancellation of incentive increments for higher qualifications and recovery of excess amounts paid - The petitioner challenged the action claiming entitlement based on Government Orders that encourage higher qualifications for teachers, specifically G.O.Ms.No.324 dated 25.04.1995 specifying that higher qualifications related to subjects in the higher secondary syllabus are eligible for incentive increments. The court found the impugned cancellation order to be unsustainable, reaffirming that past payments made under valid government orders based on qualifications should not be recovered. (Paras 1, 5, 13, 14, 16)

Table of Content
1. challenge against cancellation of increments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. examination of prior government orders related to increments. (Para 5 , 7 , 9)
3. the implications of restricting eligibility for increments. (Para 10 , 11)
4. recognition of rights based on valid increments. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
5. final decision favoring the petitioner. (Para 16 , 18)

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order cancelling the incentive increments which is already granted to the petitioner and ordered to recover the incentives which are paid and also to revise the scale of pay for acquiring additional degree.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in Panchayat Union Middle School, Pillaiyarkuppam, Thirunavalur Union, Villupuram District on 19.10.2004. While she was working as Secondary Grade Teacher, she was permitted to study higher degrees. The petitioner had completed higher degrees such as B.Sc (Mathematics). B.Ed, M.Sc. (Mathematics). Therefore, she was sanctioned two sets of incentive increments for acquiring higher qualification. The Government of Tamil Nadu with an object of encouraging teachers for acquiring higher qualification for the benefits of students originally issued G.O.Ms.No.42 Educational Department, dated 10.01.1969 introducing the scheme of incentive increment for acquiring higher educational qualification. It proceeded to grant incentive increment (equivalent to two advance increments) for possessing or acquiring higher qualification in any degree course of study. On the basis of Government order, various orders were issued for grant of incentive increment to different categories of teachers subsequently. The Government passed another order in G.O.Ms.No.907 P & AR Department dated 17.09.1996 based on the recommendations of 4th Pay Commission that the higher qualification for the purpose of grant of incentive increment should be with reference to the area of specialisation instead of any other subject. Since there were lot of representations from various Teachers’ Association, the Government issued another order in G.O.Ms.No.624 Education Department dated 13.07.1992 introducing the following four conditions for grant of incentive increment.

(i) Sanction of incentive increments to a teacher for acquiring higher qualification in particular subject to the condition that the teacher will also be required to teach that in addition to the subject teacher used to teach.

(ii) In respect of the past cases, those enrolled for courses of higher studies upto the academic year 1991~92, the restriction imposed in G.O.Ms.No.907 P & AR (FR.II) Department dated 17.09.1989 shall be relaxed to cover really relevant courses all subjects in the school curriculam. The Director of School Education shall judge the relevance in such cases no arrears of the incentive increment shall be allowed. Monetary benefit of incentive increment in such cases shall be allowed with effect from the date of issue of these orders.

(iii) In respect of teachers enrolling during 1992~93 and after, sanction of increments shall be restricted to developing areas of study and subjects where teachers shortage has been identified. The Director of School Education will identify the subjects for purposes of incentive increment in which teachers will be encouraged to qualify in consultation with the Government in all future case. The intention is to encourage the teachers to get higher qualification in those specially selected subjects.

(iv) In respect of physical education teachers incentive increments will be sanctioned in future only in the area of physical education with a view to upgrade physical training. The Director of School Education will identify the courses in this area also.

4. However, on receipt of other representations stating that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.624 dated 13.07.1992 are not feasible for being implemented, s

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