Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs R.Murugesan on 2 February, 2022
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.02.2022
CORAM :
The Honourable Mr.Justice M.DURAISWAMY
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Finance (Pay Cell) Department,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Pay and Accounts Officer,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009. … Appellants
Vs.
R.Murugesan ... Respondent
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to
dismiss the order dated 11.06.2015 made in W.P.No.5192 of 2015 passed
by this Court and set aside the same.
For Appellants : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar,
Additional Govt. Pleader
For Respondent : Mr.P.Chandrasekar
Page No.1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P.No.5192 of 2015 dated 11.06.2015,
allowing the said Writ Petition.
2. Heard Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and
Mr.P.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) The respondent was working as a Motor Cycle Messenger in
Secretariat, Chennai at Finance (PC) Department from the year 1989.
From the date of appointment, the respondent had been discharging his
duties as Motor Cycle Messenger and there were no promotional avenues
open to the respondent and others, who had been working in the same
cadre in various Departments of the Government, therefore, all of them
continued to work as drivers for decades, thereby entailing them for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
grant of Selection Grade on completion of 10 years and Special Grade on
completion of 20 years of service.
(ii) The Government Drivers Association, in which the respondent
was also a member, took up the issue with regard to the grant of better
scales of pay, as there were no promotional avenues for the drivers and
the same was placed before a Committee and the said Committee was
called as “Official Committee”, which submitted a report and thereby
G.O.Ms.No.162 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 13.04.1998 came
to be issued on the basis of the aforesaid Committee's report. As per the
said Government order, Selection Grade and Special Grade have been
revised based on the existing pay scales as per Schedule-II and further
the same shall be regulated as follows:-
(a) For the post having no promotional
avenue, Selection Grade and Special Grade shall be
allowed as indicated in the schedule-II.
(b) For the post having the promotional post,
the Selection Grade should be limited to the pay
scales of the first level promotion post and Special
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
Grade shall be limited to the pay scales of second
level promotional post.
4. Taking into account the order in letter and spirit and the pay
revision/fixation as prescribed in the Government order, most of the
Heads of the Departments have extended the benefits of Selection/
Special Grade to the Drivers' category, which had no promotional
avenue/promotional post at all, as it can be well said “Once a Driver is
Always a Driver”.
5. The action of the appellants in not granting selection grade/
special grade as in the revised Pay Rules on the basis of the
recommendation made by the “Official Committee” in G.O.Ms.No.162,
Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 13.04.1998 and in issuing
clarifications on misconception, in letter No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-11
dated 08.11.2010 and more particularly, paragraph 5 therein, which
restricted the re-fixation of the pay to the first and second level
promotion posts, are against law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
6. Thereafter, the respondent filed the subject matter Writ Petition
No.5192 of 2015 challenging the above Government letter No.63305/Pay
Cell/2010-11 dated 08.11.2010 and the learned Single Judge, while
allowing the Writ Petition vide order dated 11.06.2015, held that the
respondent herein is entitled to the re-fixation of pay scale of Rs.5000-
150-8000 from the date of his movement to the selection grade and in the
pay scale of Rs.5500-175-9000, from the date of his movement to the
special grade, as ordered by a Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court,
since, the respondent was also a similarly placed person as that of the
petitioners in W.P.No.2363 of 2013. Aggrieved over the same, the
appellants have filed the present Writ Appeal challenging the above
order passed by the learned Single Judge.
7.The issue involved in the present case is covered by the decision
of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos.9533-9537 of 2019
[P.Singaravelan & Ors. etc Vs. The District Collector, Tiruppur and DT
& Ors. etc]. For better appreciation, the relevant paragraphs from Civil
Appeals @ SLPs [Dairy No.42301 of 2017] are extracted below:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
“2. These appeals have been filed by the State of Tamil
Nadu, represented by its Principal Secretary, Finance
(Pay Cell) Department against the judgment and
order dated 05.01.2015 of this High Court of Madras
in W.P.No.2363 of 2013, and the final judgment and
order dated 11.09.2017 dismissing Review Application
No.153 of 2016 against the same, with respect to the
pay scale entitlements of certain drivers employed by
the High Court of Madras in terms of G.O.Ms.No.162.
3. These appeals arise out of virtually the same factual
background as those disposed of above. W.P.No.2363
of 2013 was filed by the concerned drivers employed
with the High Court of Madras, seeking quashing of
paragraph 5 of Letter No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-1
dated 08.11.2010 issued by the State Government on
which basis the Government had denied the benefit of
Selection and Special Grade pay scales as per Serial
No.8 of Schedule II of the 1998 Rules under
G.O.Ms.No.162. The petitioners therein also sought a
direction to the State Government for appropriate
fixation of pay scales in the above terms.
4. The Division Bench allowed the writ petition on the
ground that the drivers were not entitled to any
promotional avenues, and hence were entitled to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
full benefits of the appropriate pay scale under
Schedule II of the 1998 Rules. It was further found
that the drivers were entitled to benefits under Serial
No.8 of the said schedule, looking to the disposal of
similar matters by the High Court and this Court. The
review application filed against the same also came to
be dismissed by the high Court.
5. As discussed supra, it has not been disputed before
us that the drivers concerned were not entitled to any
promotional avenues. Thus, it is evident that the High
Court rightly concluded that the drivers were entitled
to the full benefits of the appropriate pay scale under
Schedule II of the 1998 Rules. However, in light of
our foregoing finding that persons employed in the
post of drivers in various departments in the
Government of Tamil Nadu are only entitled to
Ordinary, Selection and Special Grade pay scales in
terms of Serial No.6 of Schedule II of the 1998 Rules,
i.e. at Rs.3200-4900, Rs.4000-6000 and Rs.4300-6000
respectively, we have no hesitation to hold that the
High Court erred in directing fixation of such pay
scales to drivers employed at the High Court in terms
of Serial No.8 of the Schedule II, fixing Selection
Grade and Special Grade scales of pay of Rs.5000-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
8000 and Rs.5500-9000 respectively.
6. The appeals are therefore allowed partly, to the
extent that the State Government is directed to fix the
pay scale benefits available to the Respondents in the
instant appeals in terms of Serial No.6 of Schedule II
of the 1998 Rules under G.O.Ms.No.162”
8. Following the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the above
said judgment, a Division Bench of this Court allowed the Review
Applications and dismissed the Writ Petitions and Writ Appeals subject
to the observations made in paragraph No.16 of the order dated
15.04.2011. Subsequently, this Court dismissed the Writ Appeal
Nos.745 to 747 of 2017 as infructuous based on the statement made by
the learned counsel for the appellants in view of the order dated
15.04.2021 passed in the Review Application Nos.121 to 129 of 2017.
9. In view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Civil
Appeal Nos.9533-9537 of 2019 [Civil Appeals @ SLPs [Dairy No.42301
of 2017]], the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
Review Application No.120 to 129 of 2017 dated 15.04.2002 and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
common judgment passed by this Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 745 to 747
of 2017 dated 07.12.2021, the Writ Appeal is liable to be allowed.
Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P.No. 5192 of 2015 dated 11.06.2015 is set
aside. No costs.
(M.D.,J.) (J.S.N.P.,J.)
02.02.2022
vm
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
and
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
(vm)
To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Finance (Pay Cell) Department,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Pay and Accounts Officer,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
W.A.No.1639 of 2015
02.02.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
