Madras High Court
The District Educational Officer vs R.Arockia Sagayaraj on 15 April, 2021
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.04.2021
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
The Hon'ble Mrs.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD) Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
and
CMP(MD).Nos.4953 and 5189 of 2020
in
W.P(MD).No.8171 of 2020
and
W.P.(MD).No.8046 of 2018
W.A.(MD) No.911 of 2020
1. The District Educational Officer,
Lalgudi Educational District,
Lalgudi,
Tiruchirappalli District.
2. The Block Educational Officer,
Lalgudi Union,
Lalgudi Educational District,
Tiruchirappalli District.
... Appellants/Respondents
Vs
R.Arockia Sagayaraj ... Respondent/Writ Petitioner
Prayer in W.A(MD).No.911 of 2020: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, against the order dated 28.07.2020, passed in W.P.(MD) No.8171 of
2018.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
W.A.(MD) No.955 of 2020
1. The District Elementary Educational
Officer, Sivagangai District.
2. The Additional Assistant Elementary
Educational Officer, Kalaiyarkoil,
Sivagangai District.
... Appellants/Respondents 1 and 2
Vs
A.John Peter ... Respondent/Writ Petitioner
Prayer in W.A(MD).No.955 of 2020: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, against the order dated 28.07.2020, passed in W.P.(MD) No.8046 of
2020.
For Appellants : Mrs.S.Srimathy,
Special Government Pleader
in both Writ Appeals
For Respondent : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan,
in W.A(MD).No.911 of 2020
Mr.Panneer Selvam
in W.A(MD).No.955 of 2020
COMMON JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
These appeals filed by the Education Department is directed against
the order dated 28.07.2020, passed in W.P(MD).Nos.8171 of 2020 and 8046
of 2018.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
2. The order impunged in the writ petitions are dated 12.06.2019 and
03.08.2016, by which, the respondents-writ petitioners' request for stepping
up their pay on par with their juniors, was declined solely on the ground that
their juniors were working in a School in a different Panchayat Union. The
correctness of such a stand has been tested in several cases and the learned
Writ Court by following the decision in W.P(MD).No.742 of 2018 dated
07.02.2018, allowed the writ petitions and aggrieved over the same, the
department is before us.
3. We have elaborately heard Mrs.S.Srimathy, learned Special
Government Pleader for the appellants, Mr.V.Panneer Selvam and
Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarathanan, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. We find that the reasons cited in the orders impugned in the writ
petitions are on the ground that the respondents-writ petitioners and the
other teachers were working in two different Panchayat Union Schools.
Similar issue came up for hearing before this Court on earlier occassions
and one such decision in W.P(MD).No.742 of 2018, dated 07.02.2018, was
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
followed by the learned Single Bench. Identical issue was considered by the
Division Bench in W.A(MD).No.1220 of 2019, which was filed by the
Education Department challenging the order in W.P(MD).No.4231 of 2019
and the department appeal was dismissed holding that the distinction sought
to be drawn by the department on the ground that the two teachers are
working in two different Panchayat Union Schools is not sustainable.
Therefore, we find that there is no error in the order passed in the writ
petition.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
appellants-Department would vehemently contend that though the reasons
given in the orders impugned in the writ petitions may not be fully
sustainable, yet the question of stepping up of the pay would not arise, as all
pay anomoly issue consequent upon revision of pay and allowances
pursuant to the recommendations of the pay commissions are governed by
the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Rules 2017, issued by the Government in
G.O.Ms.No.303, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 11.10.2017.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
6. The learned Special Government Pleader has drawn our attention
to the relevant portions of the Government Order and submitted that if the
issue is considered in terms of the guidelines laid down in the Rules, the
question of stepping-up of the pay would not arise. We cannot accept this
submission made by the department at this juncture for more than one
reason. Firstly, the orders impugned in the writ petitions does not refer to
G.O.Ms.No.303, for declining stepping up of pay. Secondly in the writ
petitions, no such argument was advanced by the department and though in
other cases counter affidavits have been filed, this contention was never
raised. Even though the impugned order was passed after passing of
G.O.Ms.No.303, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 11.10.2017, there is
no reference of G.O., in the impugned order.
7. Therefore, based on G.O.Ms.No.303, we cannot interefere in the
orders passed in the writ peitions. As in our opinion, if according to the
appellants-department the stepping up cannot be done in terms of the Tamil
Nadu Revised Pay Rules 2017, it gives a separate cause of action and
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
therefore, the request of the respondents-teachers should be processed in
accordance with the Rules and not for the reasons cited in the impugned
order passed in the writ petition, which has been rightly quashed.
8. Accordingly, while confirming the orders passed in the writ
petitions quashing the impunged order therein, we give liberty to the
appellants-department to consider the case of the respondents-teachers,
based on the Tamil Nadu Revised Pay Rules 2017, in accordance with law
and if so adviced, by taking into account the relevant Government Orders.
Accordingly, orders in the Writ Petitions are confirmed.
9. The Writ Appeals stand dismissed with the
aforementioned observation and consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
15.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
pkn
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
Note : In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that
the copy of the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
To
1. The District Educational Officer,
Lalgudi Educational District,
Lalgudi,
Tiruchirappalli District.
2. The Block Educational Officer,
Lalgudi Union,
Lalgudi Educational District,
Tiruchirappalli District.
3. The District Elementary Educational
Officer, Sivagangai District.
4. The Additional Assistant Elementary
Educational Officer, Kalaiyarkoil,
Sivagangai District.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD) Nos.911 and 955 of 2020
15.04.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
