The court determined that the eligibility for salary increments related to higher qualifications does not depend on the mode of degree acquisition.

ORDER

The proceedings of the second respondent in Ref. No Na.Ka. No 053130 /

Aakatha / 2024 dated Nil / 07/ 2024 raising audit objection to the grant of incentive for the M.Phil Degree obtained through part time mode and ordering recovery of the incentive granted to the petitioner from the salary of the petitioner from 05.06.2016 and of the fifth respondent vide Reference No. na.Ka. no 610/ A1 / 2025 dated 19.03.2025, are put under challenge in the present Writ Petition. Further, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents to continue to pay the incentive amount to the petitioner for having acquired M.Phil Degree through Part time along with petitioner’s salary.

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

3. The facts which lead to the filing of the present Writ Petition is as follows:

3.1. The petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the year

1996 in the Education Department and thereafter promoted as Headmaster in the year 2013. He completed M.Phil and obtained the degree from Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli, for which he was granted incentive increment by the fourth respondent on 16.11.2017. While so, the second respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated nil.07.2024 that the petitioner is ineligible for increment for M.Phil Degree on the ground that the same was obtained through distance education mode by citing various Government Letters and G.O.91, Higher Education Department, dated 29.08.2006 and directed the fifth respondent to recover the incentive amount paid to the petitioner for M.Phil Degree, due to which, the present impugned order dated 19.02.2025 was passed by the fifth respondent for recovery of the incentive amount granted to the petitioner from 05.06.2016. However, the said order was not yet implemented. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per G.O.(1D)

No.18, School Education (E2) Department, dated 18.01.2013, the impugned order of recovery is not sustainable and the petitioner is eligible for incentive increment for M.Phil Degree. She also drew the attention of this Court to the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.518 of

2024 and hence, prayed this Court to allow the present Writ Petition.

5. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents has not disputed the facts of the case and the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. On perusal of the case reveals that the issue involved in this case is no longer res-judicata, as the same was decided by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.518 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024 [The Director of School Education, College Road, Nungampakkam, Chennai-06 & 2 Others Vs. P.Sarumathi and Another]. The relevant paragraphs of the said decision is extracted hereunder:

“10. We are not impressed with the said submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the appellants for the simple reason that the Division Bench has specifically considered the import of G.O(Ms).No.91, Higher Education Department, dated 03.04.2009 at paragraphs 33 and 34 of the judgment in Sivan's case (cited supra) and has held as follows:-

''33. In this context, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the State has relied upon the G.O.Ms.No.91, Higher Education Department, dated 03.04.2009 and has stated that the Government by the said G.O, declared that the M.Phil and Ph.D degree obtained through the correspondence or Distance Education or Open University system are ineligible for Governmen