Madras High Court
The Agricultural Production ... vs G.Muruganandham on 4 August, 2021
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
and
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021 and
Caveat Nos.2370, 2386 to 2390, 2390, 2392 and 2393 of 2021
1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner/
The Principal Secretary
Agriculture Department
Secretariat, Chennai
2.The Director of Agriculture
Office of the Director of Agriculture
Chepauk, Chennai - 5
3.The Joint Director of Agriculture
Office of the JDA
Coimbatore - 13 ... Appellants
Vs.
1.G.Muruganandham
2.P.Venkatachalam
3.M.Jayaraman
4.C.Udhayasuriyan
5.J.Shaik Ameel
6.T.Eswaran
7.M.V.Chandran
8.A.Galeel
9.S.Shanthi
10.M.Saravanakumar
11.P.Dhandapani ...Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
***
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 23.11.2020 passed in W.P. No.7144 of
2014.
***
For Appellants : Mr.R.Neelagandan
State Government Counsel
For Respondents : Mr.T.Arul for R11
Mr.K.Thilageswaran for R10
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.)
This intra-court appeal is filed by the Government against the
order dated 23.11.2020 passed in the writ petition, which relates to
the regularisation of the Assistant Agricultural Officers and fixation
of their seniority.
2. A bunch of writ petitioners, filed W.P. No.7144 of 2014
seeking relief to fix the pay band for the petitioners on par with
other Assistant Agricultural Officers, who were recruited by the
same Notification dated 26.08.2008.
3. The writ petitioners are all Diploma Holders in Agricultural
course and are eligible for the appointment of Assistant Agricultural
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
Officer. In view of the abolition of the post of Field Administrative
Officer and its upgradation as Assistant Agricultural Officer, the
recruitment of Assistant Agricultural Officer, was suspended for a
while. The State Government also had banned all new recruitments
between the years 2001 and 2006.
4. After a long wait, a recruitment Notification was issued on
26.08.2008 in which 1707 vacancies of Assistant Agricultural
Officers were called for through employment seniority and
interview. The age limit for BC/FC candidates was 40 years and for
SC/ST candidates was 45. Though the writ petitioners were
sponsored by the Directorate of Employment and Training, due to
the fixation of the age, they were not called for the interview. They
filed W.P. No.8297/2008, in which 93 vacancies were directed to be
reserved by an interim order on 12.01.2009. The writ petition was
allowed on 19.04.2010, directing the appellants herein to issue call
letters, without fixing the upper age limit. Accordingly, the writ
petitioners were called for an interview and the appointment letters
were issued to them in the month of July 2010.
5. The basic pay for Assistant Agricultural Officer was fixed as
Rs.5,200 - 20,200 + Rs.2,400/- as grade pay. Later by G.O. Ms.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
No.258 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 26.08.2010, it was
altered as Rs.5,200 - 20,200 + Rs.2,800/-. It is stated that those
Agricultural Officers, who were appointed by the same Notification
in the month of June 2009, were originally fixed as 4000-100-6000
and the same was revised after the VI Pay Commission.
Unfortunately the said pay revision was not extended to the writ
petitioners herein, who were also appointed by the same
Notification by the same employment seniority, but only in the year
2010 in view of the writ petition. Various representations were
given to the authorities in this regard. By the impugned order dated
22.05.2013 which was challenged in the writ petition, the appellants
had rejected the claim of the petitioners stating that their
appointments were made after 01.06.2009 and the other Assistant
Agricultural Officers, who got higher pay band, were appointed prior
to 01.06.2009. As the qualification, seniority, notification, mode of
appointment, posting, etc. are one and the same for the petitioners
as well as those who were appointed prior to 01.06.2009, the
petitioners also wanted the same pay scale. The only difference was
that the writ petitioners had to get their appointments by virtue of
the order of the court, which can be stated as administrative delay.
However, the learned counsel for the appellants/authorities
contended that the petitioners were selected only pursuant to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
order in W.P. No.8297 of 2008 dated 19.04.2010. Therefore, they
cannot claim that they were all appointed prior to 01.06.2009. As
the petitioners were appointed only prior to the year 2010, there
was no violation of Government Rules and prayed for allowing the
appeal.
6. The learned single Judge, who heard the matter, based on
the order passed in an identical issue, which was considered by this
court in W.P. Nos.15378 to 15383 of 2013 dated 03.10.2019
in P.Kalimuthu and others vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others,
allowed the writ petition. In the said order, the facts were identical
where there was a delay due to administrative reasons, the
employees cannot be deprived of the benefits. When similarly
placed Government servants were given the benefit of G.O. Ms.
No.340 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 26.08.2010, it was
held that the writ petitioners therein were also entitled to for the
same benefit. In this regard, it is worthwhile to advert to paragraph
No.4 of the G.O. Ms. No.340, which reads thus:
"4) The Government has carefully examined the
above recommendations of the One Man Commission
and decided to rectify the anomaly as pointed out by
the One Man Commission. Accordingly, the Government
direct that in exercise of the powers conferred under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
Rule-13 of the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules,
2009 relax the Rule-9 of the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales
of Pay Rules, 2009 in favour of the incumbents recruited
as Junior Assistants from among the Contract
Assistants/Agricultural Officers and any other similar
categories of posts recruited by the Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission in the same batch prior to 1.6.2009
and joined/appointed on a subsequent date on or after
1.6.2009 due to administrative reasons duly allowing
the fitment benefit to the individual employees
concerned as a special case. However, Government
direct that the above fixation benefit shall be given
notional effect from the date of appointment of the
individual employees concerned with monetary benefit
from 1.8.2010."
7. As per the above Government Order, the benefits was
extended to all the categories of posts recruited by the Tamil Nadu
Public Service Commission prior to 01.06.2009 and joined on a
subsequent date on or after 01.06.2009 due to administrative
reasons. When the above Government Order categorically provides
for extending the benefits of the pay band even for those who were
appointed after the cut-off date, namely 01.06.2009, the
administrative reasons due to which the delay had occurred cannot
be put against the writ petitioners. The facts of the present case
also would go to show that it was not the fault of the petitioners in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 6/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
joining the post belatedly, but it was due to the pendency of the
case and the age limit. As there was no recruitment for more than
18 years for the post of Assistant Agricultural Officers, the
petitioners by the time they had applied, had crossed the age of 40.
They would get the orders of appointment issued only in 2010. They
should also be extended the same benefit as of the Assistant
Agricultural Officers who were recruited, based on the same
notification.
8. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel for the
respondents that the Director of Agriculture vide proceedings dated
11.01.2021 made in FSE1/88389/2013, passed the following order:
" Consequent to the above order of the Hon'ble
Madurai Bench of High Court, Government directed in
the Government Order sixth read above and subsequent
amendment in Government Order 7th read above
extended the benefits of G.O. Ms. No.340 Finance (Pay
Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010 to the
petitioners/individuals on par with the batch-mates who
had joined prior to 01.06.2009 and directed the Director
of Agriculture to re-fix the pay of the
individuals/petitioners' concerned by issuing the
separate office proceedings.
As powers conferred in the Government Order
6th read, the pay fixing authorities concerned are
directed to re-fix the pay of the Assistant Agricultural
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 7/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
Officers indicated in the Annexure (70 persons) to this
orders by allowing the 1.86 fitment (4000x1.86=7440)
notionally from the date of joining, with monetary
benefit from 01.08.2010."
9. When the Government itself has already extended the
benefits of G.O. Ms. No.340 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated
26.08.2010 to the individuals, on par with their batch-mates, who
were joined prior to 01.06.2009, the learned single Judge had
followed the same and rightly allowed the writ petition, which
requires no interference.
10. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. However, there
is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected civil
miscellaneous petition and the caveat petitions are closed.
[P.S.N., J.] [K.R., J.]
04.08.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Asr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 8/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
To
1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner/
The Principal Secretary
Agriculture Department
Secretariat, Chennai
2.The Director of Agriculture
Office of the Director of Agriculture
Chepauk, Chennai - 5
3.The Joint Director of Agriculture
Office of the JDA
Coimbatore - 13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 9/10
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
AND
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
Asr
W.A.No.1836 of 2021 and
C.M.P. No.11609 of 2021
Date : 04.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 10/10
