Madras High Court
M.Shanmuganathan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 10 March, 2022
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD) Nos.1661, 24375, 24761 & 25975 of 2019
4601, 4602, 6323, 6359, 6843, 6923, 7070, 7915, 7918, 8029, 8902,
8971, 9413, 9823, 9841, 9977, 9978, 9986, 10003, 11379, 11392,
11418, 12373 & 16234 of 2020
1787, 8954, 8959, 9175, 9177, 9180, 9182, 9183, 9184, 9185, 9186,
9199, 9200, 9265 & 16686 of 2021
1711 & 1716 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.1415, 1416, 21006, 21367 & 22968 of 2019
3955, 3957, 3958, 3959, 5555, 5597, 5598, 6250, 6346, 6347, 7381,
7382, 7386, 7387, 7461, 7462, 8151, 8152, 8202, 8203, 8540, 8541,
8809, 8811, 8812, 8825, 8826, 8916, 8917, 8918, 8919, 8921, 8923,
8924, 8925, 8927, 8928, 8929, 8930, 8936, 9952, 9953, 9968, 9972,
9993, 9994, 10583, 10584, 10587, 13573, 13574, 13575 & 13576 of
2020
1519, 1521, 6754, 6755, 6910, 6911, 6914, 6916, 6917, 6918, 6919,
6920, 6931, 6932, 6933, 6978, 11066, 11067, 13572, 16915 & 16916 of
2021
727, 789, 811, 815, 838, 844, 918, 925, 1027, 1512, 1514, 1526, 1528,
1537, 1538, 1540, 1542 & 1543 of 2022
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019:
M.Shanmuganathan ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Principal Secretary
Department of Higher Education
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009
_______________
Page 1 of 42
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
2.The Commissioner of Technical Education
Directorate of Technical Education (DOTE)
53, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy
Chennai-600 025
3.The Accounts – General
Office of the Accountant General
(Accounts & Entitlements) – Tamil Nadu
361, Anna Salai, Teynampet
Chennai-600 018
4.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary
Personnel and Administrative
Reforms Department
Fort St.George
Chennai-600 009
5.The Chairman
All India Council for Technical Education
Nelson Mandela Marg
Vasant Kunj
New Delhi-110 070 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to
the impugned G.O.Ms.No.58, dated 21.03.2018, issued by the first respondent
and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to
follow existing Recruitment Rules (RRs) and sanction all due promotions with
arrears of backwages.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
For Petitioner : Mr.Rajpal Singh
For Respondents : Mr.Veera.Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
assisted by Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar
Additional Government Pleader for R1, R2 & R4
Mr.P.Gunasekaran for R3
Mr.N.Dilip Kumar for R5
COMMON ORDER
Since the issues involved in all the cases are identical, they have
been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this
common order.
2. All the above writ petitions have been categorized as follows:
W.P.(MD) No.25975 of 2019
W.P.(MD) Nos.4601, 4602, 7070, 7918, 11392, 12373 &
16234 of 2020
BATCH – I
W.P.(MD) Nos.8954, 8959, 9175, 9177, 9180, 9182, 9183,
9184, 9185, 9186, 9199, 9200, 9265 & 16686 of 2021
W.P.(MD) Nos.1711 & 1716 of 2022
W.P.(MD) Nos.24375 & 24761 of 2019
W.P.(MD) Nos.6323, 6359, 6843, 6923, 7915, 8029, 8902,
BATCH – II 9413, 9823, 9841, 9977, 9978, 9986, 10003, 11379, 11418,
of 2020
W.P.(MD) No.1787 of 2021
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
3. All these writ petitions have been filed questioning the recovery
orders passed pursuant to the orders of the Commissioner of Technical
Education.
4. The petitioners are serving or retired Lecturers / Professors /
Heads of Departments in the Government Polytechnic Colleges / Government
Aided Private Polytechnic Colleges and they have served as Instructors,
Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, Professors, Heads of Departments and Principals.
5. The issue involved in the case on hand is whether the pay
fixation and arrears of pay claimed by the petitioners are in consonance with
the Regulations issued by the All India Council for Technical Education (for
brevity “AICTE”), which were implemented by the Government through
Government Orders.
6. The respective learned counsels appearing for the petitioners
mainly contended that with effect from 01.01.2006, the date on which the Pay
Commission recommendations were implemented, the Government Order
issued in G.O.(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
25.05.2010, was implemented. Accordingly, the pay was revised with effect
from 01.01.2006 to all the categories of teaching staff working in the
Government Polytechnic Colleges and Government Aided Private Polytechnic
Colleges. As per the said Government Order, Career Advancement Scheme
has been provided and based on the qualifications and years of service
rendered, Academic Grade Pay was fixed. The respective learned counsels
appearing for the petitioners are of the opinion that there is no infirmity in
respect of pay fixation made to all the petitioners in accordance with G.O.(Ms)
No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department dated 25.05.2010.
7. Subsequently, All India Council for Technical Education (Career
Advancement Schemes for Teachers and other Academic Staff in Technical
Institutions) (Diploma) Regulations, 2012 (in short “2012 Regulations”) were
issued. The said 2012 Regulations came into effect from the year 2012 and
were implemented by the Government of Tamil Nadu by issuing G.O.(Ms) No.
58, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated 21.03.2018. The contentions of
the petitioners are that the Career Advancement Scheme with reference to
G.O.(Ms) No.111, dated 25.05.2010, was fixed in accordance with the
Government Order and they were receiving the pay accordingly. As far as
2012 Regulations are concerned, as per the eligibility, the pay was revised to
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
the petitioners with reference to the qualifications stipulated in 2012
Regulations and therefore, the recovery is untenable and liable to be set aside.
8. It is further contended that the petitioners, who come under the
category of Batch-I writ petitions, were not provided with an opportunity to
appear before the Screening Committee constituted under G.O.(Ms) No.58,
Higher Education (C2) Department, dated 21.03.2018. Denial of opportunity
is in violation of the principles of natural justice. In the event of affording due
opportunity, the petitioners would be in a position to place their service details
along with the Government Orders and convince the Committee for the
purpose of establishing the correctness of the pay fixed in accordance with
G.O.(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated 25.05.2010.
9. The respective learned counsels appearing for the petitioners,
with reference to certain individual cases, raised grounds by stating that the
petitioners are fully qualified for Career Advancement Scheme. Their
qualifications are not properly verified. Therefore, the impugned orders of
recovery are not in consonance with the Government Orders as well as the
Career Advancement Scheme. Some of the petitioners have raised a ground
that their qualifications were ascertained by the Authorities concerned and
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
pay fixation was done by the Management of the Polytechnic Colleges. Once
the qualifications were verified in consonance with the Government Order,
then there is no question of revising the same now after retirement in some
cases and for in-service teaching staff in other cases.
10. While countering the arguments advanced on behalf of the
petitioners, the learned Additional Advocate General pointed out that errors
were crept-in at various stages and the respective Polytechnic Management /
Principals are the Pay Drawing Officers, who in turn without getting approval
from the Commissioner of Technical Education, fixed pay at their whims and
fancies by erroneously interpreting the Government Order as well as 2012
Regulations issued by AICTE.
11. The learned Additional Advocate General drew the attention of
this Court with reference to the Circular issued by the Commissioner of
Technical Education to all the Principals of the Government Aided Private
Polytechnic Colleges vide Letter dated 20.02.2012. In the said Circular, the
Commissioner of Technical Education has specifically referred G.O.(Ms) No.
111, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated 25.05.2010. With reference to
G.O.(Ms) No.111, dated 25.05.2010, the said Circular was issued stating that
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
while granting upgradation and fixation of pay, proposals along with all the
particulars must be submitted to the Commissioner of Technical Education
enabling him to grant approval for the purpose of revision of pay. In respect of
Government Polytechnic Colleges are concerned, the Commissioner of
Technical Education issued a separate Circular, dated 05.03.2012. Thus,
with reference to fixation of pay and Academic Grade Pay and grant of Career
Advancement Scheme, proposals are to be submitted in a prescribed format
along with all details to the Commissioner of Technical Education and the said
proposals are to be approved by the Commissioner of Technical Education,
then alone the College concerned could submit a bill for drawal of pay.
12. The learned Additional Advocate General reiterated that the
said procedure had not been followed by the Pay Drawing Officers of the
respective Polytechnic Colleges. Contrarily, they have adopted their own
interpretation and granted pay fixation and Career Advancement Scheme in
excess, which resulted in huge financial loss to the State Exchequer and this
was traced out by the Authorities Competent and thereafter, actions were
taken to set right the issue and recover the excess amount paid to the
teaching staff of the respective Polytechnic Colleges.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
13. The learned Additional Advocate General further pointed out
that the Government Order in G.O.(Ms) No.58, Higher Education (C2)
Department, dated 21.03.2018, was issued in implementation of 2012
Regulations to the Government and Government Aided Private Polytechnic
Colleges. Pursuant to the said Government Order, Screening-cum-Evaluation
Committee and Selection Committee were constituted. The constitution of the
Committee is also done in the Government Order. Therefore, the Committee
was constituted to rectify the anomalies, errors crept-in in respect of
erroneous fixation of pay and grant of arrears under the Career Advancement
Scheme to the teaching staff. The endeavour of the Committee is to ensure
that the Government Orders issued in consonance with AICTE Regulations are
properly implemented by the respective Polytechnic Colleges across the State
of Tamil Nadu. In this context, the Commissioner of Technical Education has
also issued Circulars to ensure that proposals must be submitted to him for
the purpose of grant of approval. However, these Circulars issued by the
Commissioner of Technical Education were not followed by the Polytechnic
Colleges before effecting refixation of pay and grant of arrears to its teaching
staff.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
14. The learned Additional Advocate General relied on the
constitution of the Screening-cum-Evaluation Committee, wherein the
Commissioner of Technical Education / Nominee of Commissioner of
Technical Education is shown as the Chairperson and the Principal of the
College concerned, Head of the concerned Department from the Polytechnic
College and two subject experts not connected with the College and in case of
Aided Polytechnic Colleges notified / declared as Minority Educational
Institutions, one subject expert not connected with the State to be nominated
by the Chairperson of the Governing Body of the College out of the panel of
five names, preferably from minority communities, recommended by the State
Government from the list of subject experts approved by the relevant statutory
body of the College are also made as members. An academician representing
SC / ST / OBC / Minority / Women / Differently-abled categories are also
included. Therefore, the Committee was constituted in a fair and reasonable
manner so as to avoid any bias in the matter of considering the issues and
taking decision.
15. Relying on the constitution of the Screening-cum-Evaluation
Committee, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
Committee has gone into the issues regarding Career Advancement Scheme,
scrutinized the same and found that there were large scale irregularities in the
matter of pay fixation and payment of arrears made to the teaching staff.
16. The learned Additional Advocate General further contended
that the implementation of G.O.(Ms) No.111, dated 25.05.2010, is not in
dispute. As per the said Government Order, the Career Advancement Scheme
was given as prescribed in the said Government Order. However, for further
Career Advancement Scheme under 2012 Regulations, G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated
21.03.2018, is to be followed and prior approval must be obtained from the
Commissioner. The said position is clarified in the G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated
21.03.2018 itself. The said Government Order further states that in order to
achieve the norms of Career Advancement Scheme, after 08.11.2012, the
qualifications contemplated under 2012 Regulations must be followed.
Therefore, the Career Advancement Scheme implemented as per G.O.(Ms) No.
111, dated 25.05.2010 is not in dispute and further revision based on 2012
Regulations with retrospective effect was found to be irregular and not in
consonance with the Government Order in G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
17. The learned Additional Advocate General further submits that
for the faculty achieving the norms of Career Advancement Scheme after
08.11.2012, the academic grade progressions shall be fixed notionally on the
date of attaining eligibility and the financial benefit from the date of issue of
G.O.(Ms) No.58 i.e. from 21.03.2018. However, in the present case, the Career
Advancement Scheme was implemented with retrospective effect and the
monetary benefit was also granted with retrospective effect, which is in total
violation of the Government Order and caused huge loss to the State
Exchequer and therefore, the respondents are bound to initiate action for
recovery of payment already made.
18. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully
perused the materials available on record.
19. On hearing the learned counsel on either side, this Court has
to to consider the scope of the Career Advancement Scheme with reference to
the Government Orders, more specifically, with effect from 01.01.2006.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
20. The Scheme of Career Advancement is a Scheme, which was
introduced for encouraging the teaching staff to acquire more educational
qualifications for the benefit of the students studying in the Polytechnic
Colleges and to impart better education. The said Scheme is not part of the
service conditions. The Career Advancement Scheme is a special Scheme
introduced pursuant to the recommendations of the University Grants
Commission and AICTE for the purpose of encouraging the teaching staff and
such schemes are not implemented for non-teaching staff. Thus, the Scheme
is to be implemented strictly in consonance with the terms and conditions.
The Scheme being a concession extended to the teaching staff and to
encourage them to possess more educational qualifications for the purpose of
imparting better education. It cannot be allowed to be implemented in excess,
undoubtedly, which would create unnecessary financial loss to the State
Exchequer.
21. Contextually, G.O.(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2)
Department, dated 25.05.2010, would be relevant as far as the present writ
petitions are concerned. The said Government Order states about the Revised
Pay Scales, 2010 and Revision of Scale of Pay and Allowances etc., to the
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
teachers and equivalent cadres in Government and Government Aided
Polytechnic Colleges governed by AICTE. The said Government Order also
states about pay fixation formula. Accordingly, the pay fixation adopted for
the teachers governed by the University Grants Commission scales of pay shall
be adopted for the teachers governed by the AICTE Scales of Pay. The detailed
fitment tables for various existing scales of pay based on the formula are given
in Appendix-III. The implementation of the said Government Order is also not
disputed by the respondents. However, the erroneous fixation of pay alone is
sought to be rectified with reference to the date of implementation and the
manner in which it is implemented.
22. Let us now consider the spirit of G.O.(Ms) No.58, Higher
Education (C2) Department, dated 21.03.2018. The said Government Order
was issued pursuant to the implementation of 2012 Regulations to the
Government and Government Aided Private Polytechnic Colleges. The said
Government Order refers G.O.(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department,
dated 25.05.2010. Therefore, G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018 is in
continuation of G.O.(Ms) No.111, dated 25.05.2010 and in lieu of 2012
Regulations issued by AICTE. Thus, the pay fixation correctly made in
accordance with G.O.(Ms) No.111, dated 25.05.2010, need not be disturbed.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
However, while revising the scale of pay under 2012 Regulations with effect
from the year 2018, the Government has to ensure that the qualifications
contemplated under 2012 Regulations are scrupulously followed and
accordingly, Career Advancement Scheme is implemented. In the event of any
erroneous implementation of the Scheme, Authorities Competent are
empowered to initiate action.
23. In the present case, G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018,
unambiguously provides constitution of Screening-cum-Evaluation
Committee. The said Committee was constituted for the purpose of Career
Advancement Scheme implemented by all the Polytechnic Colleges across the
State of Tamil Nadu, while the Committee consists the members, who all are
from the respective Colleges also. Therefore, there is no need to doubt about
the constitution of the Committee and the Committee constituted was for the
purpose of screening the Career Advancement Scheme granted to the teaching
staff of the Polytechnic Colleges. G.O.(Ms) No.58 speaks about G.O.(Ms) No.
111 also. A specific clarification is issued in Paragraph No.3(e) and (f), which
is extracted hereunder:
“(e) The faculty who have already achieved the
Career Advancement Scheme nors as specified in G.O.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated
25.5.2010, before the issue of AICTE, Regulations on
8.11.2012, be given the Academic Grade Pay
progression and monetary benefits from the date of
attaining eligibility, since that Government Order has
already been implemented and given effect to.
(f) G.O.(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2)
Department, dated 25.5.2010, also states that norms as
per AICTE Regulations shall become applicable for
Career Advancement Scheme.
Since, AICTE Regulations were issued on
8.11.2012, from this date onwards, faculty should fulfill
Training and Publications norms as specified in the said
Regulations.”
24. As per the aforesaid Government Order, the faculty, who have
already achieved the Career Advancement Scheme norms as specified in G.O.
(Ms) No.111, Higher Education (C2) Department, dated 25.05.2010, before the
issue of AICTE Regulations on 08.11.2012, be given the Academic Grade Pay
Progression and monetary benefits from the date of attaining eligibility. The
said Government Order was admittedly implemented and given effect to by the
Authorities Competent. However, a dispute arose regarding implementation of
2012 Regulations with effect from 08.11.2012. While implementing G.O.(Ms)
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
No.58, dated 21.03.2018, the effect was given erroneously by the Polytechnic
Colleges and the monetary benefits were claimed retrospectively for which the
teaching staff are not entitled and therefore, the Authorities Competent
initiated actions for recovery of excess amount.
25. Paragraph No.3(h) of G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018,
stipulates unambiguously as follows:
“(h) For the faculty achieving the Career
Advancement Scheme norms after 8.11.2012 (without
API till 7.11.2015 and with API from 8.11.2015), the
Academic Grade Pay progression shall be fixed
notionally on the date of attaining eligibility and with
financial benefits from the date of issue of Government
Order.”
26. Therefore, the Career Advancement Scheme norms after
08.11.2012, the Academic Grade Pay progression shall be fixed notionally on
the date of attaining eligibility as per 2012 Regulations and financial benefits
must be given with effect from the date of issue of the Government Order i.e.
21.03.2018. However, actual benefits were granted by the Polytechnic
Colleges, more so, by the respective Principals of the Colleges, without getting
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
prior approval from the Commissioner of Technical Education, with
retrospective effect and by implementing G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018,
by adopting erroneous interpretation. This caused huge financial loss to the
State Exchequer.
27. Now, the question arises an opportunity was provided to the
petitioners or not.
28. The learned Additional Advocate General made a submission
that in respect of revision of pay on Career Advancement Scheme, if an
opportunity was not given or if those candidates had not already appeared
before the Screening-cum-Evaluation Committee, then an opportunity will be
given to them for making their appearance from 21.03.2022 to 23.03.2022
from 11.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m. Therefore, all the petitioners, who had not
appeared on the earlier occasion before the Screening-cum-Evaluation
Committee, are at liberty to send their service particulars, objections and
documents establishing their eligibility through online to the Commissioner of
Technical Education, who is the Chairman of the Committee and in turn will
place the same before the Committee for consideration and accordingly, take a
decision in consonance with the Scheme. Even if the petitioners have chosen
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
to appear before the Committee in person, they are at liberty to appear before
the Committee for representing their case from 21.03.2022 to 23.03.2022
between 11.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m.
29. The endeavour of the Committee is to ensure whether the
respective teaching staff fulfills the norms / eligibility / qualifications
prescribed under the Regulations, which were implemented by the
Government of Tamil Nadu vide G.O.(Ms) No.58, dated 21.03.2018. In the
event of fulfilling the norms, the pay fixation on the Career Advancement
Scheme shall be given notionally with effect from the date on which the staff
attaining the eligibility and the financial benefits shall be given from the date
of issue of G.O.(Ms) No.58 i.e.21.03.2018. However, if the Screening
Committee found that fixations have been made erroneously and payments
have been made in excess, then such excess amount is to be recovered from
the teaching staff concerned.
30. This Court is of the considered opinion that unjust
enrichment of public money is impermissible. Tax payers' money is being paid
by way of salary to the teaching staff of Polytechnic Colleges. They are entitled
to get pay as per the Scheme and as per the norms of AICTE and Government
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
Orders in force. Erroneous fixation and excess payment would result in
unjust enrichment and hence, excess payment is to be recovered and to be
deposited in the Government Treasury by all concerned. Certain exceptions
have been carved out by the Honourable Supreme Court in cases, where there
is an extreme hardship caused. However, in all other cases, any excess
payment is made to the public servant, excess payment must be recovered.
31. In Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others vs. State of
Uttarkhand and others, reported in (2012) 8 SCC 417, the Honourable
Supreme Court has observed as follows:
“14. We are concerned with the excess payment
of public money which is often described as “tax payers
money” which belongs neither to the officers who have
effected over-payment nor that of the recipients. We fail
to see why the concept of fraud or misrepresentation is
being brought in such situations. Question to be asked is
whether excess money has been paid or not may be due
to a bona fide mistake. Possibly, effecting excess
payment of public money by Government officers, may
be due to various reasons like negligence, carelessness,
collusion, favouritism etc. because money in such
situation does not belong to the payer or the payee.
Situations may also arise where both the payer and the
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
payee are at fault, then the mistake is mutual. Payments
are being effected in many situations without any
authority of law and payments have been received by
the recipients also without any authority of law. Any
amount paid/received without authority of law can
always be recovered barring few exceptions of extreme
hardships but not as a matter of right, in such situations
law implies an obligation on the payee to repay the
money, otherwise it would amount to unjust enrichment.
15. We are, therefore, of the considered view that
except few instances pointed out in Syed Abdul Qadir
case (supra) and in Col. B.J. Akkara (retd.) case (supra),
the excess payment made due to wrong/irregular pay
fixation can always be recovered.
16. The appellants in the appeal will not fall in
any of these exceptional categories, over and above,
there was a stipulation in the fixation order that in the
condition of irregular/wrong pay fixation, the institution
in which the appellants were working would be
responsible for recovery of the amount received in
excess from the salary/pension. In such circumstances,
we find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the
High Court. However, we order the excess payment
made be recovered from the appellant’s salary in twelve
equal monthly installments starting from October 2012.”
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
32. The above principles have been reiterated by the Apex Court in
the subsequent Judgments also. Therefore, any excess payment must be
recovered by the Competent Authorities and there should not be any scope for
unjust enrichment.
33. As far as the case on hand is concerned. The same would not
fall under the exempted category from recovery as the petitioners are / were
working as Professors, Lecturers, Heads of Departments, Principals etc., which
all are falling under Group-A Category. More over, even they are receiving
decent amount of salary / pension. Under those circumstances, if any excess
payment is made, it is to be recovered and if at all there is any personal
grievance raised, it is to be recovered by way of equal installments.
34. As per 2012 Regulations (Notification dated 08.11.2012, the
minimum academic performance and service requirements for promotion
under Career Advancement Scheme applicable for the teachers of Polytechnic
Colleges (Engineering) are as follows:
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
II III
I AICTE AICTE
G.O.Ms.No.111 Regulation-2012 Regulation-2012
1 2 3
Hr.Edn.dated without Academic with Academic
25.05.2010 Performance Performance
Indicator Indicator
Promotio
n of Service
S. 01.01.2006 to 08.11.2012 to 08.11.2015 to till
Teachers Requireme
No 07.11.2012 07.11.2015 date
through nts
CAS
STAGE 1 1) Lecturer Two AICTE/State Two AICTE/State Two AICTE/State
completed Government Government Government
Rs. 6 years approved refresher approved refresher approved refresher
5400/- to with B.E., Programs of not less Programs of not Programs of not
Rs. only(witho than two weeks each less than two less than two
6000/- ut duration and two weeks each weeks each
M.E.,/Ph.D one week each duration and two duration and two
.,) TEQIP sponsored one week each one week each
programs TEQIP sponsored TEQIP sponsored
programs programs
Two
courses/programs of Two Two
1 one week duration courses/programs courses/programs
each approved of of one week of one week
conducted by duration each duration each
AICTE/UGC/MHRD/ approved of approved of
DST/Central/State conducted by conducted by
Govt. AICTE/UGC/MHR AICTE/UGC/MHR
Universities/Institut D/DST/ D/DST/Central/St
es may also by Central/State Govt. ate Govt.
considered as Universities/Institu Universities/Institu
alternative to TEQIP tes may also be tes may also by
programs. considered as considered as
alternative to alternative to
TEQIP programs. TEQIP programs.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 1 1) Lecturer Two AICTE/State 1) One orientation 1) Minimum API
to 2 completed Government and one Scores using PBAS
4 years approved refresher Refresher/Researc scoring
Rs. with Ph.D., Programs of not less h Methodology proformance
6000/- to in the than two weeks each Course of 2/3 developed by the
Rs. relevant duration and two weeks duration AICTE as per the
7000/- discipline one week each approved or norms provided in
TEQIP sponsored conducted by Table 2
2) Lecturer programs AICTE/Central
completed Govt./State 2) One orientation
5 years Two Govt./TEQIP/CIICP and one
with M.E., courses/programs of /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/ Refresher/Research
in the one week duration DTE/SBTE/Univer Methodology
relevant each approved of sity,etc. Course of 2/3
discipline. conducted by weeks duration
AICTE/UGC/MHRD/ 2) Screening-cum- approved or
3) Lecturer DST/Central/State Verification process conducted by
with B.E., Govt. for recommending AICTE/Central
(6+3=9 Universities/Institut promotion. Govt./State
years) es may also by Govt./TEQIP/CIICP
considered as /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/
alternative to TEQIP DTE/SBTE/Univer
programs. sity, etc.
3) Screening-cum-
Verification process
for recommending
promotion.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 2 Lecturer Two AICTE/State 1) One Course 1) Minimum API
TO 3 with Government Program from Scores using PBAS
completed approved refresher among the scoring proforms
Rs. services of Programs of not less categories of developed by the
7000/- to 5 years in than two weeks each refresher concerned State
Rs. stage 2 duration and two courses,methodolog Govt. as per the
8000/- one week each y workshops, norms provided in
Lecturer TEQIP sponsored Training,Teaching- Table 2
with programs Learning-
completed Evaluation 2) One Course
services of Two Technology Program from
4 years in courses/programs of Programs, Softamong the
stage 2 for one week duration Skills development categories of
PhD each approved of Programs and refresher courses,
holders conducted by Faculty methodology
AICTE/UGC/MHRD/ Development workshops,
(for only DST/Central/ Programs of 2/3 Training, Teaching-
those State Govt. weeks duration Learning-
Lecturers Universities/Institut approved orEvaluation
who have es may also be conducted byTechnology
not availed considered as AICTE/Central Programs, Soft
the benefit alternative to TEQIP Govt./State Skills development
in the programs. Govt./TEQIP/CIICP Programs and
previous /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/ Faculty
stage DTE/SBTE/Univer Development
upward- sity,etc. Programs of 2/3
movement) weeks duration
2) Screening-cum- approved or
Verification process conducted by
for recommending AICTE/Central
promotion Govt./State
Govt./TEQIP/CIICP
/ISTE/NITTR/IIT/
DTE/SBTE/Univer
sity,etc.
3) Screening-cum-
Verification process
for recommending
promotion
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 3 Lecturer Two AICTE/State 1) At least three 1) Minimum API
TO 4 with Government publications in the Scores using PBAS
completed approved refresher entire period as scoring proforms
Rs. services of Programs of not less Lecturer(12 Years). developed by the
8000/- to 3 years in than two weeks each However in the AICTE as per the
Rs. stage 3 duration and two case of College norms provided in
9000/- one week each teachers an Table 2
(However, TEQIP sponsored exemption of one
those programs publication will be 2) At least three
joining the given to M.Phil., publications in the
Service Two Holders and an entire period as
after courses/programs of exemption of two Lecturer(12 Years).
05.03.2010 one week duration publications will be However in the case
shall have each approved or given to of College teachers
also earned conducted by Ph.D.,holders. an exemption of
Ph.D., in AICTE/UGC/MHRD/ one publication will
the DST/Central/State 2) Programs of be given to M.Phil.,
relevant Govt. minimum one week Holders and an
discipline, Universities/Institut duration approved exemption of two
in addition es may also by or conducted by publications will be
to the considered as AICTE/Central given to Ph.D.,
conditions alternative to TEQIP Govt./State One holders.
laid down programs. Course/Program
in from among the 3) Programs of
Regulation categories of minimum one week
dated methodology duration approved
4 08.11.2012 workshops, or conducted by
)(3.8 of Training, Teaching- AICTE/Central
AICTE Learning- Govt./State One
2012 Evaluation Course/Program
notificatio Technology from among the
n) Programs, Soft categories of
Skills development methodology
Programs and workshops,
Faculty Training, Teaching-
Development Learning-
Govt./TEQIP/CIICP Evaluation
/ISTE/NITTR/IIT/ Technology
DTE/SBTE/Univer Programs, Soft
sity,etc. Skills development
Programs and
3) A Selection Faculty
Committee Process Development
as stipulated in the Govt./TEQIP/CIICP
Regulation and in /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/
Table II(A)/II(B) of DTE/SBTE/Univer
Appendix I. sity,etc.
4) A Selection
Committee Process
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 4 HOD with HOD with 3 years of 1)HOD/Lecturer 1)HOD/Lecturer
TO 5 3 years of completed service with 3 years of with 3 years of
completed with Ph.D., in the completed service completed service
Rs. service relevant Discipline in stage 4 with in stage 4 with
9000/- to with Ph.D., Ph.D., in the Ph.D., in the
Rs. in the Two AICTE/State relevant Discipline relevant Discipline
10000/- relevant Government
discipline approved refresher 2) A Minimum of
upto programs of not less three publications 2) Minimum
07.11.2012 than two weeks each since the period yearly/cumulative
. duration and two that the teacher is API scores using
one week each placed in stage. the PBAS scoring
HOD/Lect TEQIP sponsored proforma developed
urer with 3 programs. 3) A Selection by the AICTE as
years of Committee Process per the norms
completed Two as stipulated in the provided in Table 2.
service in courses/programs of Regulation and in Teachers may
5 stage 4 one week duration Table II(A)/II(B) of combine two
with Ph.D., each approved or Appendix I. assessment
in the conducted by periods(in Stages 2
relevant AICTE/UGC/MHRD/ and 3) to achieve
Discipline DST/Central/State minimum API
on or after Govt. Universities/ Scores,if required.
08.11.2012 Institutes may also
be considered as 3) A Minimum of
AICTE alternative to TEQIP three publications
Clarificatio programs. since the period
n Dated that the teacher is
04.01.2016 placed in stage.
Serial No. 4) A Selection
24 and Committee Process
Page No. as stipulated in the
24 Regulation and in
Table 2
35. The minimum academic performance and service
requirements for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme applicable for
the teachers of Polytechnic Colleges (Non Engineering – Humanities) are as
follows:
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
II III
I
AICTE AICTE
Regulation-2012 Regulation-2012
1 2 3 G.O.Ms.No.111
without Academic with Academic
Hr.Edn.dated
Performance Performance
25.05.2010
Indicator Indicator
Promotion
of Service
S. 01.01.2006 to 08.11.2012 to 08.11.2015 to
Teachers Requirement
No 07.11.2012 07.11.2015 till date
through s
CAS
STAGE 1 1)Lecturer Two AICTE/State Two AICTE/State Two AICTE/State
completed 6 Government Government Government
Rs.5400/- years with approved approved refresher approved
to M.A.,/M.SC., refresher Programs of not less refresher
Rs.6000/- / Programs of not than two weeks Programs of not
M.Com., less than two each duration and less than two
only(without weeks each two one week each weeks each
M.Phil.,/Ph.D duration and two TEQIP sponsored duration and two
.,) one week each programs one week each
TEQIP sponsored TEQIP sponsored
programs Two programs
courses/programs
Two of one week Two
courses/programs duration each courses/programs
of one week approved of of one week
duration each conducted by duration each
approved of AICTE/UGC/MHRD approved or
conducted by /DST/ conducted by
AICTE/UGC/MH Central/State Govt. AICTE/UGC/MHR
RD/DST/Central Universities/Institut D/DST/Central/
/State Govt. es may also be State Govt.
Universities/Instit considered as Universities/
utes may also by alternative to TEQIP Institutes may
considered as programs. also by considered
alternative to as alternative to
TEQIP programs. TEQIP programs.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 1 1) Lecturer Two AICTE/State 1) One orientation 1) Minimum API
to 2 completed 4 Government and one Scores using
years with approved Refresher/Research PBAS scoring
Rs.6000/- Ph.D., in the refresher Methodology Course proforms
to relevant Programs of not of 2/3 weeks developed by the
Rs.7000/- discipline less than two duration approved AICTE as per the
weeks each or conducted by norms provided in
2) Lecturer duration and two AICTE/Central Table 2
completed 5 one week each Govt./State
years with TEQIP sponsored Govt./TEQIP/CIICP 2) One orientation
M.Phil., in programs /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/D and one
the relevant TE/SBTE/Universit Refresher/Resear
discipline. Two y,etc. ch Methodology
courses/programs Course of 2/3
2 3) Lecturer of one week 2) Screening-cum- weeks duration
with duration each Verification process approved or
M.A.,/M.Sc., approved of for recommending conducted by
/ conducted by promotion. AICTE/Central
M.Com., AICTE/UGC/MH Govt./State
(6+3=9 years) RD/DST/Central Govt./TEQIP/CII
/State Govt. CP/ISTE/NITTR/I
Universities/Instit IT/DTE/SBTE/
utes may also by University, etc.
considered as
alternative to 3)Screening-cum-
TEQIP programs. Verification
process for
recommending
promotion.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 2 Lecturer with Two AICTE/State 1) One Course 1) Minimum API
TO 3 completed Government Program from Scores using
services of 5 approved among the PBAS scoring
Rs.7000/- years in stage refresher categories of proforma
to 2 Programs of not refresher developed by the
Rs.8000/- less than two courses,methodolog AICTE as per the
Lecturer with weeks each y workshops, norms provided in
completed duration and two Training,Teaching- Table 2
services of 4 one week each Learning-Evaluation
years in stage TEQIP sponsored Technology 2) One Course
2 for PhD programs Programs, SoftProgram from
holders Skills development among the
Two Programs and categories of
(for only courses/programs Faculty refresher courses,
those of one week Development methodology
Lecturers duration each Programs of 2/3 workshops,
who have not approved of weeks duration Training,
availed the conducted by approved orTeaching-
benefit in the AICTE/UGC/MH conducted byLearning-
previous RD/DST/Central AICTE/Central Evaluation
stage /State Govt. Govt./State Technology
3 upward- Universities/Instit Govt./TEQIP/CIICP Programs, Soft
movement) utes may also by /ISTE/NITTR/IIT/D Skills
For those considered as TE/SBTE/Universit development
joining the alternative to y,etc. Programs and
service after TEQIP programs. Faculty
05.03.2010, 2) Screening-cum- Development
Ph.D is Verification process Programs of 2/3
essential for recommending weeks duration
qualification promotion approved or
for upward conducted by
movement AICTE/Central
to Govt./State
Govt./TEQIP/CII
Lecturer(Sel
CP/ISTE/NITTR/I
ection
IT/DTE/SBTE/U
Grade)(SI. niversity,etc.
No. 10 of
AICTE 2016 3) Screening-cum-
clarification) Verification
process for
recommending
promotion
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 3 Lecturer with Two AICTE/State 1) At least three 1) Minimum API
TO 4 completed Government publications in the Scores using
services of 3 approved entire period as PBAS scoring
Rs.8000/- years in stage refresher Lecturer(12 Years). proforma
to 3 Programs of not However in the case developed by the
Rs.9000/- less than two of College teachers AICTE as per the
(However, weeks each an exemption of one norms provided in
those joining duration and two publication will be Table 2
the Service one week each given to M.Phil.
after TEQIP sponsored Holders and an 2) At least three
05.03.2010 programs exemption of two publications in
shall have publications will be the entire period
also earned Two given to as Lecturer(12
Ph.D., in the courses/programs Ph.d.,holders. Years). However
relevant of one week in the case of
discipline, in duration each 2) Programs of College teachers
addition to approved or minimum one week an exemption of
the conducted by duration approved one publication
conditions AICTE/UGC/MH or conducted by will be given to
laid down in RD/DST/Central AICTE/Central M.Phil. Holders
Regulation /State Govt. Govt./State One and an exemption
dated Universities/Instit Course/Program of two
08.11.2012) utes may also by from among the publications will
(3.8 of AICTE considered as categories of be given to
2012 alternative to methodology Ph.D.,holders.
notification) TEQIP programs. workshops,
Training, Teaching- 3) Programs of
Learning-Evaluation minimum one
Technology week duration
Programs, Soft approved or
Skills development conducted by
Programs and AICTE/Central
Faculty Govt./State One
Development Course/Program
Govt./TEQIP/CIICP from among the
/ISTE/NITTR/IIT/D categories of
TE/SBTE/Universit methodology
y,etc. workshops,
Training,
3) A Selection Teaching-
Committee Process Learning-
as stipulated in the Evaluation
Regulation and in Technology
Table 2. Programs, Soft
Skills
development
Programs and
Faculty
Development
Govt./TEQIP/CII
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
STAGE 4 HOD/lecture HOD with 3 years 1) HOD/Lecturer 1) HOD/Lecturer
TO 5 r with 3 years of completed with 3 years of with 3 years of
of completed service in stage 4 completed service in completed service
Rs.9000/- service with with Ph.D., in the stage 4 with Ph.D., in stage 4 with
to Ph.D., in the relevant in the relevant Ph.D., in the
Rs. relevant Discipline Discipline relevant
10000/- discipline Discipline
upto Two AICTE/State 2) A Minimum of
07.11.2012. Government three publications
approved since the period that 2) Minimum
HOD/Lecture refresher the teacher is placed yearly/cumulative
r with 3 years programs of not in stage. API scores using
of completed less than two the PBAS scoring
service in weeks each 3) A Selection proforma
stage 4 with duration and two Committee Process developed by the
Ph.D., in the one week each as stipulated in the AICTE as per the
relevant TEQIP sponsored Regulation and in norms provided in
Discipline on programs. Table 2. Table 2. Teachers
or after may combine two
08.11.2012 Two assessment
courses/programs periods(in Stages
AICTE of one week 2 and 3) to
Clarification duration each achieve minimum
Dated approved or API Scores,if
04.01.2016 conducted by required.
AICTE/UGC/MH
Serial No. 24 RD/DST/Central 3) A Minimum of
and Page No. /State Govt. three publications
24 Universities/ since the period
Institutes may that the teacher is
also by placed in stage.
considered as
alternative to 4) A Selection
TEQIP programs. Committee
Process as
stipulated in the
Regulation and in
Table 2
36. With reference to the above, the learned Additional Advocate
General for example demonstrated that in some cases, where erroneous pay
fixation / academic grade pay movement was made by the Principal of the
Institution. While perusing the particulars given in many cases, the academic
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
grade pay was granted with effect from 01.01.2006, without properly verifying
the eligibility of the Government Order in force, in certain cases, benefits were
given with retrospective effect, which is not contemplated in G.O.(Ms) No.58,
dated 21.03.2018. However, all these factors are to be verified with reference
to the eligibility and qualification of the individuals in accordance with the
Scheme and the same are to be rectified and excess payment, if any, paid to
the teaching staff must be recovered in the interest of public as pointed out
earlier. No Government servant should be allowed to have unjust enrichment
of public money.
37. The Career Advancement Scheme with reference to 2012
Regulations and the consequential Government Order are made undoubtedly
based on the erroneous interpretation of the Government Order. The eligibility
criteria date from which the monetary benefits to be extended both notional
and actual resulted in huge monetary loss to the State Exchequer running to
several crores. The wrong interpretation and excess payment of monetary
benefits to the teaching staff is particularly made since no prior approval of
the of Commissioner of Technical Education was obtained and in the event of
obtaining any such approval, uniformity and consistency would have been
maintained. Without obtaining prior approval from the Commissioner of
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
Technical Education, each Polytechnic College fixed the pay and paid arrears
as per their own interpretation or by following the other Colleges. In view of
the anomalous situation and considering the fact that there is a huge financial
loss to the Government, while implementing the Government Orders, the
Government constituted a Screening Committee for the purpose of verification
of eligibility and therefore, the Screening Committee must be allowed to do the
said exercise thoroughly by assessing the eligibility of the teaching staff, fix
their eligibility and accordingly, grant Career Advancement Scheme by fixing
the scale of pay in accordance with the Scheme. Such an exercise is imminent
for the purpose of settling the issues and to avoid the multiplicity of
proceedings.
38. In view of the fact that this Court cannot conduct an enquiry
in respect of the individual's qualifications and eligibility, the matters are to be
placed before the Screening Committee for ascertaining the eligibility of the
individuals for correct pay fixation and for the benefits of Career Advancement
Scheme.
39. As far as Batch-I writ petitions are concerned, it is submitted
by the learned Additional Advocate General that the petitioners were not
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
provided with an opportunity to place their objections before the Screening
Committee. Though the Management had participated in the Screening
Committee as members, the individual are also to be provided with an
opportunity to submit their respective defence / objections and establish their
eligibility for the purpose of getting benefits of Career Advancement Scheme.
40. The learned Additional Advocate General undertakes that once
the Committee makes a fresh recommendation, certain orders, which all are
correctly passed by the Management, will be confirmed and in such cases,
there is no necessity for the Authority Competent to pass fresh orders and in
cases, where mistakes occurred, then fresh orders will be passed by the
Authority Competent in accordance with the Government Orders in force by
cancelling the earlier orders.
41. In view of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the petitioners come under Batch-I writ petitions are
entitled to get opportunity to appear before the Screening Committee
scheduled to be conducted from 21.03.2022 to 23.03.2022 between 11.00
a.m., and 05.00 p.m.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
42. This being the factum,
➢ The orders impugned in the Batch-I writ
petitions are directed to be kept in abeyance till
such time the Committee takes a decision after
affording due opportunity to all the petitioners in
Batch-I writ petitions and orders are passed by
the Authority competent.
➢ The petitioners in Batch-I writ petitions are at
liberty to send their service particulars,
objections and documents establishing their
eligibility through online to the Commissioner of
Technical Education, who is the Chairman of the
Committee. Even if the petitioners have chosen
to appear before the Screening Committee in
person, they are at liberty to appear before the
Committee for representing their case from
21.03.2022 to 23.03.2022 between 11.00 a.m.
and 05.00 p.m.
➢ Thereafter, the Authority Competent shall
consider the same in consonance with the
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
Scheme and pass orders on merits and in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as
possible.
43. Insofar as the petitioners come under Batch-II writ petitions
are concerned, they have availed the opportunity and appeared before the
Screening Committee and presented their case. Therefore, providing further
opportunity to them would not arise at all as the principles of natural justice
have been complied with. The only endeavour is to ensure that the
correctness or otherwise of the impugned orders now questioned by the
petitioners is to be once again scrutinized by the Appellate Authority. As far
as the Original Authority is concerned, the petitioners have participated before
the Screening Committee representing their case and the Original Authority
has taken a decision and issued the impugned orders of recovery and this
Court do not find any infirmity. In such view of the matter,
➢ the petitioners come under Batch-II writ petitions are
at liberty to prefer appeal along with the documents
and Government Orders in force under the General
Rules before the Secretary to Government, Higher
Education Department / Appellate Authority.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
➢ In the event of submitting any such appeal, the
Appellate Authority shall consider the same on merits
and in accordance with law and pass appropriate
orders as expeditiously as possible.
➢ The petitioners are at liberty to file interim
applications along with the appeals before the
Appellant Authority for grant of stay of the recovery
orders.
44. W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 is concerned, Mr.Rajpal Singh,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made a submission that he is
confining the relief sought for in the writ petition as the learned Additional
Advocate General made a submission that the petitioners will be permitted to
appear before the Screening Committee to place all the documents and to
establish their case. Therefore, the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 is
directed to comply with the directions issued in respect of Batch-I writ
petitions.
45. As far as W.P.(MD) No.8971 of 2020 is concerned, The
Authority Competent is directed to verify as to whether the petitioner in W.P.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
(MD) No.8971 of 2020 has appeared before the Screening Committee. In case
he had not appeared before the Screening Committee, he should be permitted
to appear before the Screening Committee as per the directions granted in
respect of Batch-I writ petition. In case, he appeared before the Screening
Committee, then he should be permitted to prefer appeal as per the directions
granted in Batch-II writ petitions..
46. The Secretary to Government and the Commissioner of
Technical Education are directed to ensure that all the pay fixations and other
monetary benefits granted under various Schemes are implemented
scrupulously, only after getting prior approval from the Commissionarate of
Technical Education and the Government, as the case may be. In the event of
any implementation of monetary benefits without getting prior approval from
the Heads of the Departments or Government, then, the Management /
Authority concerned of the Government Aided Private Polytechnic Colleges
must be held responsible and accountable and suitable actions are to be
initiated against the Educational Agency / Management and in case of
Government Polytechnic Colleges, disciplinary action must be taken against
the Principal / Authorities of the Colleges and the monetary loss to the
Government must be recovered from all concerned and this direction shall be
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
communicated by the Commissioner of Technical Education to all the
Polytechnic Colleges, either Government or Government Aided throughout the
State of Tamil Nadu.
47. It is made clear that the learned counsels for the petitioners
shall inform the petitioners not to wait for the certified copy of this order and
submit their explanations / objections / eligibility etc., to the Commissioner of
Technical Education, who is the Chairman of the Screening Committee
through online or in person or otherwise as directed above.
48. With the above observations and directions all these writ
petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
10.03.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
krk
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
To:
1.The Principal Secretary,
Department of Higher Education,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Technical Education,
Directorate of Technical Education (DOTE),
53, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy,
Chennai-600 025.
4.The Secretary
Personnel and Administrative
Reforms Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1661 of 2019 etc. batch
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
krk
W.P.(MD) Nos.1661, 24375, 24761 &
25975 of 2019
4601, 4602, 6323, 6359, 6843, 6923,
7070, 7915, 7918, 8029, 8902, 8971,
9413, 9823, 9841, 9977, 9978, 9986,
10003, 11379, 11392, 11418, 12373 &
16234 of 2020
1787, 8954, 8959, 9175, 9177, 9180,
9182, 9183, 9184, 9185, 9186, 9199,
9200, 9265 & 16686 of 2021
1711 & 1716 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.1415, 1416, 21006, 21367
& 22968 of 2019
3955, 3957, 3958, 3959, 5555, 5597,
5598, 6250, 6346, 6347, 7381, 7382,
7386, 7387, 7461, 7462, 8151, 8152,
8202, 8203, 8540, 8541, 8809, 8811,
8812, 8825, 8826, 8916, 8917, 8918,
8919, 8921, 8923, 8924, 8925, 8927,
8928, 8929, 8930, 8936, 9952, 9953,
9968, 9972, 9993, 9994, 10583, 10584,
10587, 13573, 13574, 13575 & 13576 of
1519, 1521, 6754, 6755, 6910, 6911,
6914, 6916, 6917, 6918, 6919, 6920,
6931, 6932, 6933, 6978, 11066, 11067,
13572, 16915 & 16916 of 2021
727, 789, 811, 815, 838, 844, 918, 925,
1027, 1512, 1514, 1526, 1528, 1537,
1538, 1540, 1542 & 1543 of 2022
10.03.2022
_______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
