The court reiterated the settled principle that selection grade pay entitlement aligns with confirmation dates post-training, as previously ruled.

6.The Secretary, P.K.N.Higher Secondary School, Tirumangalam - 625 706, Madurai District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the fifth respondent herein in O.Mu.No.1397/A5/2022 dated 26.12.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to award Selection Grade Pay to the petitioner with effect from

12.08.2007 with all attendant benefits and privileges.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Pon Ramkumar For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader *****

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the fifth respondent herein in O.Mu.No.1397/A5/2022 dated 26.12.2022, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to award Selection Grade pay to the petitioner with effect from 12.08.2007, with all attendant benefits and privileges.

2. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the issue that arises for consideration in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) Nos.975 & 977 of 2021, dated 14.10.2025 [T.Kalaiarasan and another vs. The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai – 6], against the petitioner. In paragraphs 16 to 18 of the said order, it was held as under:

“16. In the present case, the appellants have completed the training on 01.06.2002 and their appointments had been confirmed on 02.06.2002. As a result, their services were taken to have been regularized on, and with effect from 02.06.2002. Hence, they were entitled to the benefits of salary and selection grade only from that date onwards.

17. In the case of Pallivasal3 , the Court considered the ramification of the earlier judgements holding that (i) no recovery of salary be made as against those who had received the pecuniary benefits, even paid prior to their regularization; (ii) they would be entitled to pension and (iii), importantly, and specific to the present cases, the confirmation of their appointments can only be on and from the date they complete the training in the subject of Child Psychology. Para 8 of the decision in Pallivasal4 is extracted below:-

8. Their right to be regarded as persons eligible for confirmation / approval can be said to arise only after they acquired, after their training, a minimum prescribed qualification. The Government here has shown great concession to them by allowing them to retain their position even without obtaining the requisite diploma or certificate in child psychology by giving to them training in child psychology. We see nothing wrong in the Government directing that their approval / confirmation can only be on and after the date they complete the training. Their past service however shall count for pension.

18. In light of the decision as above, this issue is no longer res integra and there is no merit in the present writ appeals.”

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent placed reliance on the order of the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD) Nos.2347 & 2348 of 2016, dated 21.03.2022 [J. Annie vs. The Director of School Education, O/o. the Director of School Education, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai and others], wherein also the issue was decided against the claim made by the petitioner. 4. In the light of the above, by following the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court referred to supra, the prayer of the petitioner to award Selection Grade pay with effect from 12.08.2007, with all attendant benefits and privileges, cannot be granted. Therefore, there is no merit in the present Writ P