Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 76381

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J
J. Santhanam – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.P.Nos.9201, 9203, 9206, 9211, 9213, 11379, 11380, 11385, 11387, 11388, 11391, 11394, 11396, 11399, 11401, 15467, 15478, 15489, 15508, 15531, 15534, 15537, 15542, 15546, 16860, 17221, 17224, 17229, 17230, 17234, 17777, 17845, 18733 to 18737, 19160, 19169, 19173, 19177, 19178, 19180, 19183, 19185, 19187, 19189, 19190, 19192, 19312, 19318, 19323, 19326, 19331, 19332, 19674, 19682, 19687, 19688, 19690, 19693, 19694, 19695, 19700, 19701, 19703, 19719, 19722, 19723, 19724, 19725, 19729, 19733, 19735, 19736, 19739, 19777, 19808, 19812, 19815, 19816, 22576, 22578, 26046, 26079, 26090, 26050, 26059, 26072, 26073, 26078, 28866, 28868, 28869, 29889, 29891, 29904, 29908, 34759, 34761, 34769, 35327, 35332, 35336, 35341 & 35342 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.Saseetharan
For the Respondents: R.Neelakandan, S.Mythreye Chandru, Azizulla Khan

Rule 4(1)(iii) regarding pay bunching requires evidence of pay band migration or elevation to justify additional increments. In the absence of a change in the pay band or specific eligibility under authorized fitment tables, such increments cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 2009 - Rule 4(1)(iii) - Pay fixation - Bunching of pay stages - Applicability - Concept of bunching is applicable to avoid anomalous situations where employees drawing different stages in existing scales are fixed at same stage in revised scales - Condition for invoking additional fitment tables requires migration from one pay band to a higher level following implementation of specific government orders relating to anomaly committees. (Paras 4, 5, 10, 12)

(B) Service Law - Pay parity - Selection grade teachers - Evolution of pay band - Vocational teachers seeking benefit of increment for bunching of stages - Absence of migration to higher pay band as a prerequisite for applying additional fitment tables - Pay fixation remains a policy matter for the government when not specifically covered by statutory rules for the specific category. (Paras 13, 16)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, vocational teachers, sought fixation of pay by applying Rule 4(1)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2009, specifically requesting an increment to alleviate bunching of pay stages. They argued that their pay fixation resulted in an anomaly compared to others. The government rejected these claims, maintaining that the petitioners' pay bands were not migrated to higher levels under the relevant government orders that would invoke the additional fitment tables.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the revision of pay for these teachers was limited to grade pay and did not involve a migration or elevation of the pay band. Consequently, the reliance on additional fitment tables originally intended for posts that underwent such migration is legally unsustainable. The court reaffirmed that pay fixation policies are within the government's domain and the stipulated rules for bunching could not be invoked without the required transition to higher pay structures.

Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of an additional increment under Rule 4(1)(iii) of the rules to alleviate pay bunching, and whether the additional fitment tables were applicable to the vocational teacher cadre.

Ratio Decidendi: The provision for additional increments on account of bunching requires specific conditions, primarily an elevation from one pay band to a higher one. Since vocational teachers' pay was revised only regarding grade pay and not via band migration, the specific rule and corresponding fitment tables are not applicable. Pay fixation anomalies are to be resolved according to the specific policy frameworks established for such categories.

Result: Writ Petitions stand dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek revised pay fixation based on the tamil nadu revised pay scale rules, 2009. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. rule 4(1)(iii) governs bunching of pay stages to grant additional increments. (Para 4 , 5)
3. claim of pay anomaly and request for benefits based on statutory interpretation. (Para 6 , 7)
4. additional fitment tables require prior elevation of pay bands, not applicable here. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. writ petitions are dismissed due to the inapplicability of rule 4 to vocational teachers. (Para 13)

COMMON ORDER

1.These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the order of rejection seeking fixation of pay and revised scale of pay and to pay all the consequential benefits to the petitioners by applying Rule 4 (iii) of the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2009 . Some of the Writ Petitions have been filed seeking direction to the respondents to apply Rule 4 (1) (iii) of the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2009 and fix their salary with effect from 01.01.2006 notionally with monetary benefits from 01.04.2023.

2. The issues involved in all these Writ Petitions are similar in nature and therefore this Court is inclined to pass a common order.

3. All the petitioners were appointed as Vocational Teachers and they were taking classes for the Higher Secondary Vocational Stream. After completion of ten years of service, they were paid selection grade scale of pay and thereafter, they retired from service. While being so, the Government of Tamil Nadu, in order to implement the sixth pay commission with effect from 01.06.2009 with monetary benefits from 01.01.2006, issued an order in G.O.No.234 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 01.06.2009.

4. Thereafter, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued Tamil Nadu Revision of Scales of Pay Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), which came into force with effect from 01.06.2009. Rule 4 of the Rules reads as follows :-

“4. Fixation of Pay in the revised pay structure:--The initial pay of a Government employee who elects to be governed by the revised pay structure from 1 January 2006 shall be fixed separately in respect of his substantive pay in the permanent post on which he holds a lien or would have had a lien if it had not been suspended and in respect of his pay in the officiating post held by him, in the following manner, namely:--

(1) In the case of all employees :--

(i) The pay in the pay band / pay scale shall be determined by multiplying the existing basic pay as on 1- 1-2006 by a factor of 1.86 and rounding off the resultant figure to the next multiple of 10.

(ii) If the minimum of the revised pay band / pay scale is more than the amount arrived at as per (i) above, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised pay band / pay scale;

(iii) Where, in the fixation of pay, the pay of Government employees drawing pay at two or more consecutive stages in the existing scale gets bunched, that is to say gets fixed, in the revised pay structure at the same stage in the pay band, then for every two stages so bunched, benefit of one increment shall be given so as to avoid bunching of more than two stages in the revised running pay bands. For this purpose, the increment will be calculated on the pay in the pay band only and grade pay should not be taken into account for the purpose of granting increments to alleviate bunching.

(iv) In the case of pay scales in Higher Administrative Grade (HAG) in the Pay Band 4, benefits of increments due to bunching shall be given taking into account all the stages in different pay scales in this grade.

(v) If by stepping up of the pay as above, the pay of a Government employee gets fixed at a stage in the revised pay band / pay scale (where applicable) which is higher than the stage in the revised pay an employee who was drawing pay at the next higher stage or stages in the same existing scale is fixed, the pay of the latter shall also be stepped up only to the extent by which it falls short of that of the former.

(vi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 76381

Rule 4(1)(iii) regarding pay bunching requires evidence of pay band migration or elevation to justify additional increments. In the absence of a change in the pay band or specific eligibility under authorized fitment tables, such increments cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

Cases Referred (1)