Madras High Court
State Represented By Secretary To ... vs N.Karthikeyan on 14 July, 2021
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A.Nos.370 and 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 and 1675 of 2021
(Heard through VC)
1.State represented by Secretary to Government
Education Department
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2.The Director of Elementary Education
DPI Campus
Chennai 600 006
3.The District Elementary Educational Officer
Cuddalore
4.The Addl. Assistant Educational Officer
Bhuvanagiri Block
Cuddalore District .. Appellants 1 to 4 in
both the Writ Appeals
5.The Treasury Officer
Sub .. 5th Appellant in
W.A. No.422 of 2021
Vs.
1.N.Karthikeyan
2.The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
No.361 Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 018 .. Respondents in both
the Writ Appeals
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 1/5
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent to set aside
the order dated 05.12.2017 made in W.P.No.28118 of 2011 and 12614
of 2012.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Neelakandan
in both Appeals State Government Counsel
For Respondents : Mr.T.R.Sundaram for R1
in both Appeals No Appearance for R2
JUDGMENT
[Delivered by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.]
These Writ Appeals are directed against the order of the learned
single Judge dated 05.12.2017 made in W.P.Nos.28118 of 2011 and
12614 of 2012.
2. The learned State Government Counsel appearing for the
appellants has fairly submitted that the issue involved in this appeal has
already been decided by the Division Bench in W.A.Nos.125 and 697 of
2016. The claim made by the Writ Petitioner is based on the
G.O.Ms.No.202, School Education (G2) Department dated 24.09.2008,
which is as follows:
"4/ nkw;fz;l epiyapy; jkpH;ehL epht ; hf jPh;g;ghizaj;jpd;
Mizapd; mog;gilapy; bjhlf;ff; fy;tp ,af;Fehpd; fUj;JUit muR
ed;F ghprPyid bra;J 01/06/1988?f;F Kd; bjhlf;fg; gs;sp
jiyikahrphpauhf gzpg[hpe;j Mrphpah;fs; khWjy; bgw;wgpd;. khWjy;
bgw;w xd;wpaj;jpy; mth;fs; ,ilepiy Mrphpauhf nrh;ej; pUe;jhYk;.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 2/5
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
khWjy; bgw;w xd;wpaj;jpy; gzpapy; nrh;ej; ehs; Kjy; bjhlf;fg;gs;sp
jiyikahrphpauhf fUjg;gl ntz;Lk; vdt[k; ,f;nfhhpf;if bjhlh;ghf
ePjpkd;wj;jpy; tHf;F bjhlh;e;J Miz bgw;wth;fs; kw;Wk; tHf;F
bjhluhjth;fs; cl;gl midtUf;Fk; 01/06/1988?f;F Ke;ija
gzpf;fhyj;ij fzf;fpl;L. 5?tJ Cjpa FGtpd; ghpe;Jiuapd;
mog;gilapy; btspaplg;gl;l murhiz (epiy) vz;/666/ epjpj;Jiw. ehs;
27/06/1989?d;go njh;te[ piy-rpwg;g[ epiy Cjpa eph;zak; bra;a mDkjp
mspj;Jk; muR MizapLfpwJ/"
However, the respondent had denied the same.
3. In paragraph 7 of the above referred Writ Appeal, it is stated
as follows:
"7. The material portion of G.O.Ms. 202 School
Education (G2) Department dated 24.09.2008,
extracted above would show that any person who has
served as a Primary School Headmaster before
01.06.1988, who has been transferred as a
Secondary Grade Teacher, either before or after that
date, would be entitled to be treated as Primary
School Headmaster and the benefits would be
conferred on them irrespective of the fact that they
have not approached the Court."
4. In this case also, it is not in dispute that the respondent was
initially appointed as Secondary Grade Assistant on 01.01.1971 and was
promoted as Head Master on 2.6.1976 and had worked as such till
7.7.1977. Thereafter, by the proceedings of the Commissioner of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 3/5
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
Panchayat Union dated 8.7.1977, the writ petitioner was reverted as
Assistant Teacher and had worked as Assistant Teacher up to 4.7.1997
and was paid salary as equal to the post of the Headmaster. Later on,
the petitioner was appointed and posted as Headmaster at Bhuavanagiri
and had worked up to 31.8.2006 and after seeing his performance, the
second appellant extended his service from 1.9.2006 to 31.05.2007 and
he retired from service on 31.05.2007. Therefore, in view of the above
referred G.O, the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to the benefits
including pension and other benefits, which has been decided in several
other cases and the benefits have also been extended to them.
Therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge is correct.
5. In the light of the order of the Division Bench and also in the
light of the above referred G.O, there is no infirmity in the orders passed
by the learned Single Judge and these writ appeals are liable to be
dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[P.S.N., J.] [K.R., J.]
14.07.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/No
Asr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 4/5
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
Asr
W.A.Nos.370 & 422 of 2021 and
C.M.P.Nos.1472 & 1675 of 2021
Dated : 14.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page 5/5
