Madras High Court
R. Arulraj vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 6 January, 2022
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.01.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.(MD)No. 24997 of 2018
and
WMP (MD) No. 22663 of 2018
R. Arulraj
...Petitioner
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort. St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Elementary Education,
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
3. The District Educational Officer,
Tuticorin, Tuticorin District.
4. The Block Educational Officer – I,
Alwarthirunagari Union @ Thenthiruperai
Tuticorin District.
5. The Correspondent,
TNDTA Middle School,
Themankulam,
Tiruchendur Taluk,
Tuticorin District.
.. Respondents
_____________
Page No.1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records
relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 4th respondent herein
vide O.Mu.No. 1547/A2/18 dated 03.12.2018 quash the same, and further
direct the respondents herein to sanction one set of incentive increments for
acquiring B.Ed., degree w.e.f., 01.06.2014 to the petitioner, and pass orders.
For Petitioner : Mr. A. Ajith Geethan
For Respondents : Mr. D. Sadiq Raja,
Additional Government Pleader,
for R1 to R4
Ms. Jancy Gilda
for M/s. Kingsly Solomon
for R5
ORDER
Mr. D. Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Ms. Jancy Gilda, learned counsel for
M/s. Kingsly Solomon for R5, concur on the position fairly that the relief
sought for by this petitioner is liable to be granted in view of decisions of
this court in W.A. (MD) No. 435 of 2017, W.P. Nos.31660 to 31666 of 2017
and W.P.(MD) Nos. 16574 and 16576 of 2019.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
2. The same issue has been dealt with by me as well in W.P.
(MD) Nos. 31660 to 31666 of 2017, wherein I have passed the following
order :
'The petitioners were appointed initially as
Secondary Grade Teachers. They were promoted
as Tamil Pandit on acquiring B.Lit. and thereafter
as Middle School Headmasters. They were
granted two incentive increments for having
acquired B.Ed., degree. Since the respondents
have cancelled the second incentive increment and
recovery proceedings have been issued vide
impugned proceedings dated 24.11.2017, the
petitioners have come forward with the present
writ petitions seeking quashing of the impugned
communication and a mandamus directing the
respondents to pay the incentive increment for
acquiring B.Ed. Degree in terms of G.O.Ms.No.
107, Education Department, dated 20.01.1976.
The petitioner claim that they were eligible for two
increments, one on acquiring B.Lit degree and
second on acquiring B.Ed., degree.
2. The issue in regard to grant of second
incentive increment on acquisition of additional
educational qualification was considered and
decided by the Division Bench of this court in the
case of The Director of School Education v.
V.Dhanapal (W.A.No.1664 of 2016 dated
29.06.2018). The operative portion of the
judgment is as follows:
'7. The policy decision of the
Government has been consistent to
the effect that the teachers who
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
acquire higher qualifications can be
granted two incentive increments
equivalent to four advance
increments, during the entire tenure
of their service. There is no dispute
regarding the fact that the respondent
has been awarded two incentive
increments for acquiring B.Ed. And
M.A. Qualifications. Therefore, he
cannot, as a matter of right, claim the
third set of incentive increments for
having obtained M.Phil qualification.
We are therefore, unable to sustain
the order of the learned Single Judge
directing payment of third incentive
to the respondent'
3. Mr. P. Raja, learned Government Advocate
for the respondents fairly submits that the issue is
covered by the aforesaid order passed in the Writ
Appeal. He further submits that the State has also
accepted the order of the Division Bench and no
Special Leave Petition has been filed at present.
4. In the light of the above, these Writ
Petitions are allowed and the impugned
communication dated 24.11.2017 is quashed. The
second incentive increment shall be paid to the
petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.'
3. In light of the aforesaid, the impugned order is quashed and the
incentive increment as sought for by the petitioner shall be computed and
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
paid over to him within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order. The writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
06.01.2022
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking
Internet: Yes
mnr
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.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
To
1. The Secretary,
The State of Tamilnadu
Department of School Education,
Fort. St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Elementary Education,
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
3. The District Educational Officer,
Tuticorin, Tuticorin District.
4. The Block Educational Officer – I,
Alwarthirunagari Union @ Thenthiruperai
Tuticorin District.
5. The Correspondent,
TNDTA Middle School,
Themankulam,
Tiruchendur Taluk,
Tuticorin District.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.24997 of 2018
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
mnr
W.P.(MD)No. 24997 of 2018
and
WMP (MD) No. 22663 of 2018
06.01.2022
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
