A.Rajeshwari vs The District Education officer (Elementary) Namakkal District, Namakkal

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 31024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. ASHA, J
A.Rajeshwari – Appellant
Versus
The District Education officer (Elementary) Namakkal District, Namakkal – Respondent
W.P. No.9402 of 2024

Important Points

Court disposed writ petition as relief granted; permitted challenge to pay fixation errors separately.

Subject

Service Law - Pension and Retirement Benefits

Act Referred

Constitution of India: S.226

Headnote

The petitioner sought implementation of a prior High Court order in W.P. No.9402 of 2024 for salary refixation and pensionary benefits under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Essential facts include petitioner's retirement as Higher Grade Teacher and claim for arrears. Court noted respondents' submission that relief was granted with pay fixation effected. Issue framed as compliance with prior judgment order. Court's reasoning: main relief already implemented, allowing separate challenge for any pay fixation error. Writ petition disposed of without costs.

Advocates:
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Anbarasan
For Respondent(s): M/s.Mythree Chandru SGP

Table of Content
1. prayer for salary refixation and pension implementation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. relief granted; challenge pay errors separately. (Para 3 , 4)

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

“directing the respondents to implement the orders passed by the Honourable High Court in W.P. No.9402 of 2024 as far refixation of salary and consequently give effect to the same for granting pensionary benefits with arrears if any to the petitioner.”

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, it is informed by the learned counsel for the respondents that the relief claimed by the petitioner has been already granted. The petitioner’s regularization has been given effect and his pay has also been fixed. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is an error in the pay fixation done by the respondents.

3. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

4. Since the relief claimed in this writ petition by the petitioner has been granted, this petition stands disposed of. If there is an error in the pay fixation, then, it is well open to the petitioner to challenge the same. No costs.