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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 12031

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani, J
K. Nedumaran – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU – Respondent
WP No. 2591 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J. Ravikumar
For the Respondents: Mythreye Chandru

The court directed the government authorities to consider a representation for revised pay scale benefits for a retired teacher, ensuring consistency with orders passed in identical cases.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the extension of revised pay scale benefits for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher as per G.O. Ms. No. 216 (1993), G.O. Ms. No. 69 (2013), and G.O. Ms. No. 180 (2013). The petitioner, who served from 1972 to 2007, alleged pay disparity between Secondary Grade Teachers and Headmasters of Primary Schools, noting that similar benefits were granted to others via tribunal orders. The primary issue is whether the petitioner is entitled to the revised pay scale benefits based on the cited Government Orders. The court observed that an identical issue had been addressed in W.P.No.2584 of 2026, and therefore, the representation of the petitioner should be considered in accordance with the law and existing precedents. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

Table of Content
1. claim for revised pay scale benefits for secondary grade teachers based on specific government orders and service history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. application of judicial consistency by referencing orders in identical cases. (Para 4)
3. direction to administrative authorities to decide on a representation within a stipulated timeframe. (Para 5 , 6)

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the benefit of revised pay scale in the post of secondary Grade Teacher in terms of G. O. Ms. no 216 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 22.03.1993, G.O. ms. no 69 School Education (M1) Department dated 18.04.2013 and G.O. Ms. no 180 School Education (Elementary Education -1 (2)) Department dated 06.09.2013.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Ravikumar

For Respondent(s): Ms.Mythreye Chandru, SGP

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of revised pay scale in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in terms of G. O. Ms. No 216 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 22.03.1993, G.O. Ms. No 69 School Education (M1) Department dated 18.04.2013 and G.O. Ms. No.180 School Education (Elementary Education -1 (2)) Department dated 06.09.2013.

2. Heard the learned counsels on either side. With the consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage itself.

3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

3.1. The petitioner joined as Secondary Grade Teacher (SGT) on 06.06.1972 in Sowrirajan High School, Thirurvilaiyattam, Mayiladuthurai District and thereafter was awarded with Selection Grade and Special Grade on 06.06.1982 and 06.06.1992 on completion of 10 and 20 years of service respectively and retired from service on 30.06.2007. Due to pay disparity between the SGTs and Headmasters of the Primary Schools, the Government had issued G.O.(Ms) No.216, Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 22.03.1993 and in aid of the said G.O., the scale of pay was re-fixed for one N.Govindharajan through the order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.8276 of 1997 and the petitioner herein wanted the respondents to extend the benefit of revised pay scale in the post of SGT in terms of G.O,Ms No.216, dated 22.03.1993, G.O.Ms No.69, dated 18.04.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.180 darted 06.09.2013.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court that in an identical issue, this Court had passed an order on 02.02.2026 in W.P.No.2584 of 2026 & etc., and requested to extend the same benefits to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the light of the order of this Court as stated supra, there shall be a direction to the first and fourth respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.08.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

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