Madras High Court
The District Elementary ... vs K.Balasubramani on 15 April, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
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) No.829 of 2021
and
CMP(MD).No.3691 of 2019
1. The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Karur District.
2. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
K.Paramathi, Karur District.
... Appellants/Respondents
Vs
K.Balasubramani ... Respondent/Writ Petitioner
Prayer: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order
dated 23.04.2019, passed in W.P.(MD) No.11427 of 2015.
For Appellants : Mrs.S.Srimathy,
Special Government Pleader
in all Writ Appeals
For Respondent : Mr.V.Panneerselvam,
in all Writ Appeals
__________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
This appeal filed by the Education Department is directed against the
order dated 23.04.2019, passed in W.P(MD).No.11427 of 2015.
2. The order impunged in the writ petition is dated 27.02.2015, by
which, the respondent-writ petitioner's request for stepping up his pay on
par with his junior, was declined solely on the ground that his junior was
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 petition 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 and Mr.V.Panneer Selvam, learned
Counsel appearing for the respondent.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
4. We find that the reason cited in the order impugned in the writ
petition is on the ground that the respondent-writ petitioner and the other
teacher 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 followed
by the learned Single Bench. Identical issue was considered by the Division
Bench of this Court in W.A(MD).No.1220 of 2019, which was filed by the
Education Department challenging the order passed 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 reason
given in the order impugned in the writ petition may not be fully
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
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.
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 order impugned in the writ petition does not refer to
G.O.Ms.No.303, for declining stepping up of pay. Secondly in the writ
petition, no such argument was advanced by the department and though in
other cases counter affidavits have been filed, this contention was never
raised. Thirdly, G.O.Ms.No.303, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated
11.10.2017, is much after the order impugned in the writ petition.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
7. Therefore, based on G.O.Ms.No.303, we cannot interefere in the
order passed in the writ peition. 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
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 order passed in the writ petition
quashing the impunged order therein, we give liberty to the appellants-
Department to consider the case of the respondent-teacher 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, order in the Writ Petition is confirmed.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
9. The Writ Appeal stands dismissed with the
aforementioned observation and consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
(T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
15.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
pkn
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.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD) No.829 of 2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.829 of 2021
15.04.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
