Madras High Court
N.Ramakrishnan vs The Member Secretary (Fac) / on 11 February, 2021
W.A.No.312 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.02.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.A.No.312 of 2020
N.Ramakrishnan ... appellant
Vs
1.The Member Secretary (FAC) /
District Judge,
Tamil Nadu State Legal Service Authority,
High Court Campus, North Fort Road,
Chennai 104.
2.The Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlement)
Teynampet, Chennai 18
3.Pay and Accounts Officer,
High Court, Chennai 104
4.The Treasury Officer,
Pension Pay Office,
Veterniary Hospital Campus,
Nandanam, Chennai 35.
5.State of Tamil Nadu,
through its Secretary,
Finance Department,
St.George fort,
Chennai 600 009. ... respondents
__________
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
order dated 03.12.2019 passed in W.P.No.33694 of 2019.
For Appellant :: Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents :: Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan,
State Government Pleader,
for 1st respondent
Mr.V.Vijay Shankar,
for 2nd respondent
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.)
The appellant is the unsuccessful writ petitioner. He had filed the
writ petition challenging the order dated 31.12.2013 of the first
respondent to the writ petition and prayed for the fixation of his grade
pay as a Selection Grade Junior Administrative Assistant in the pay
scale of Rs.9300-34800+4200 notionally from 01.01.2006 and for all
monetary benefits based on the Government letter dated 08.11.2010.
2. The writ petition was dismissed largely on the ground of
laches. The learned Single Bench noticed that the notification fixing the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
scale of pay was issued in the year 2013, whereas the appellant
challenged such fixation of pay in 2019. The writ appeal is filed in
these facts and circumstances.
3. The appellant contends that he was awarded the Selection
Grade in the cadre of Junior Administrative Assistant on 27.06.1999,
which is well before 01.01.2006. Consequently, it is contended that the
appellant is entitled to the revision of pay granted to other Selection
Grade Junior Assistants. Instead, it is asserted that his grade pay was
erroneously fixed at Rs.2,800/- instead of Rs.4,200/-.
4. In support of the aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the
appellant relies upon two judgments of this Court. In S.M.Kuppan vs.
Principal District Judge and others, W.P.No.32149 of 2018, order dated
21.08.2019, a Division Bench of this Court followed the judgment
delivered by the Madurai Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12104 of
2017, (C.Jacob vs. The District Judge, Sivagangai District and anr.,
dated 20.12.2017) and extended the benefit of the increased pay
scale, applicable to a Selection Grade Junior Assistant to the employee
therein. In W.P.(MD) No.12104 of 2017, the Court referred to the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
contention of the first respondent therein that the increased scale of
pay would not apply in case there is a promotional avenue and would
be restricted to the scale of pay applicable to the next promotional
post. However, this contention was not answered by the Division
Bench which confined its findings to the first clause of paragraph 4 of
the applicable Government Order viz., G.O.Ms.No.162 dated April 13,
1998 (G.O.Ms.No.162). However, in view of the fact that these
contentions were canvassed before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the said
judgments squarely cover the fact situation of the appellant and that
the principle laid down in judgments would extend to the appellant.
5. Learned counsel for the second respondent, on the other
hand, contends that clause (ii) of G.O.Ms.No.162 is squarely applicable
to the present case. Consequently, he contends that the appellant is
only entitled to grade pay of Rs.2,800/- and not Rs.4,200/-. He also
points out that the admitted position is that the appellant seeks the
benefit in respect of the period when he was a Junior Administrative
Assistant, which is a post with a promotional avenue. Therefore, he
submits that the appeal is liable to be rejected.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
6. Upon considering the rival contentions, it is evident that the
main issue to be decided is whether the appellant is making a claim
with regard to a post which had a promotional avenue or not.
Paragraph 4 of G.O.Ms.No.162 is relevant in this connection and it is
set out below :-
4.The Selection Grade and Special Grade
will be the corresponding revised scales based
on the existing pay scales of these grades. The
appropriate revised scales of pay for Selection
Grade / Special Grade are indicated in
Schedule II to the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales
of Pay Rules, 1998. Provided further, Selection
Grade and Special Grade scales shall be
regulated as below:-
(i) For posts, having no promotional avenue,
the Selection Grade and Special Grade
shall be allowed as indicated in Schedule
II;
(ii)For posts having promotional posts, if the
Selection Grade scale of pay indicated in
the said Schedule is higher than the pay
scale of promotional post, the Selection
Grade should be limited to the pay scale
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
of the first level promotion post.
Similarly, if the Special Grade scale is
higher than the pay scale of second level
promotion post, the Special Grade scale
shall be limited to the pay scale of
second level promotion post only.
The existing procedure for movement to
Selection Grade/ Special Grade and fixation of
pay in these grades shall continue to be
adopted in future in the revised scales also.
7. Keeping in mind the above paragraph 4, the case of the
appellant should be examined. In paragraph 7 of the affidavit in
support of the writ petition, the appellant states that he was awarded
the Selection Grade in the cadre of Junior Administrative Assistant on
27.06.1999 and, therefore, became entitled to the increase by way of
revision of pay. Therefore, it is clear that the claim is in respect of the
period when the appellant was a Junior Administrative Assistant. In
paragraph 4 of the aforesaid affidavit, the appellant states that he was
promoted to the post of Senior Administrative Assistant on
01.08.2006. From these averments, there can be no doubt that the
post of Junior Administrative Assistant was a promotional post and,
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
indeed, the appellant was promoted from such post to that of Senior
Administrative Assistant. Consequently, it is beyond doubt that clause
(ii) of Paragraph 4 gets triggered. Once clause (ii) is triggered, the pay
scale of the person in the Selection Grade post would be limited to the
pay scale of the first level promotional post. Mr.Vijay Shankar points
that this is precisely what was done in this case and, as a
consequence, the grade pay of the appellant was limited to Rs.2,800/-
although it would ordinarily have been Rs.4,200/- if it had not been a
promotional post. The appellant has been unable to effectively refute
this contention of the respondents. The judgment of the Madurai Bench
of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12104 of 2017 did not consider the
import of clause (ii) of paragraph 4 of G.O.Ms.No.162 and record a find
by interpreting the said clause. Instead, the Court relied on State of
Punjab v. Rafiq Masih [(2015) 4 SCC 344] to reject the employer's
endeavour to recover excess payments. The subsequent judgment in
W.P.No.32149 of 2018 followed the earlier judgment and, once again,
did not examine clause (ii) of paragraph 4 and enter findings thereon.
Therefore, these judgments do not advance the appellant's cause.
8. As such, we find that the appellant is not entitled to the relief
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
prayed for. Although the writ court decided the matter largely on the
question of laches, even if the claim is examined on merits, we find
that the appellant is not entitled to the grade pay that he requests for.
In this connection, it may also be noticed that the appellant did not
challenge G.O.Ms.No.162 dated 13.04.1998 which imposes this
limitation as regards a promotional post.
9. For all these reasons, W.A.No.312 of 2020 fails and the same
is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
(S.B., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.)
11.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
tar
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
To:
1.The Member Secretary (FAC) /
District Judge,
Tamil Nadu State Legal Service Authority,
High Court Campus, North Fort Road,
Chennai 104.
2.The Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlement)
Teynampet, Chennai 18
3.Pay and Accounts Officer,
High Court, Chennai 104
4.The Treasury Officer,
Pension Pay Office,
Veterniary Hospital Campus,
Nandanam, Chennai 35.
5.The Secretary,
Finance Department,
St.George Fort,
Chennai 600 009.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.312 of 2020
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
(tar)
W.A.No.312 of 2020
11.02.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
