Increments for qualifications must align with acquisition dates as per applicable rules, not government order issuance.

Order

The petitioner has challenged the proceedings issued by the first respondent in G.O.(1D) No.31, School Education (S.E.5(2)) Department, dated 12.02.2015, insofar as it relates to the grant of the second set of incentive increments only from 18.01.2013 in respect of the petitioner, as well as the consequential proceedings issued by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.021983/A1/2018 dated 24.10.2018.

2. The petitioner seeks to quash the said proceedings and for a consequential direction to the respondents to grant the second set of incentive increments for acquiring the M.Phil qualification from the day following the last date of examination while he was serving as Headmaster, High School, together with all consequential benefits.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:

i) The petitioner was promoted to the post of Headmaster on 05.01.2005. While serving in that capacity, he acquired the qualification of M.Phil in August 2008. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted to the post of District Educational Officer, Kancheepuram District on 09.08.2010 and thereafter promoted as Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvannamalai District on 08.11.2012.

ii) While so, the Government, vide G.O.(1D) No.18 dated 18.01.2013, brought an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.1024 dated 19.12.1993 and directed that B.T. Assistants are entitled to incentive increments for the second time for acquiring M.Phil/Ph.D. qualifications. Subsequently, the Government, vide G.O.(1D) No.31 dated 12.02.2015, included Headmasters of High Schools along with B.T. Assistants as being entitled to the second set of incentive increments for acquiring the M.Phil qualification. However, it was directed that such a second set of incentive increments would be granted only from the date of issuance of the Government Order dated 18.01.2013.

iii) By virtue of the said Government Order, the second set of incentive increments for acquiring the M.Phil qualification was restricted to the date of issuance of the Government Order dated 18.01.2013 and not from the date of acquisition of the higher qualification, namely M.Phil.

Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

4. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this Writ Petition has already been considered by the Hon’ble Madurai Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.1556 of 2025 dated 27.06.2025. It is further submitted that this Court, following the said judgment, has allowed a Writ Petition filed by similarly placed persons in W.P.No.23112 of 2017 by order dated 08.12.2025. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed that similar relief may also be granted to the petitioner.

5. The learned State Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3, however, contended that the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.A.(MD) No.1556 of 2025 dated 27.06.2025 was rendered without adhering to Rule 26 of the Fundamental Rules and therefore the said decision cannot be made applicable to the petitioner’s case. It was further contended that as on the date of issuance of the Government Order, the petitioner was not serving as Headmaster and therefore the second set of incentive increments cannot be granted from the date of acquisition of the higher qualification (M.Phil). According to the respondents, the petitioner would be entitled to the said benefit only from the date of issuance of the Government Order dated 18.01.2013.

6. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 have been duly considered.

7. As rightly pointed out