Madras High Court
The District Elementary Educational ... vs V.Chandra Pushpam on 1 December, 2023
Author: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala
Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala
W.A.(MD) No.2042 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.A.(MD) No.2042 of 2023
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.16283 of 2023
1.The District Elementary Educational Officer
Madurai District, Madurai
2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
T.Vadipatti, Madurai District ... Appellants
-vs-
1.V.Chandra Pushpam
2.The President
Kamarajar Middle School
Sholavandhan
T.Vadipatti Taluk
Madurai District ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order, dated 25.08.2021, passed in W.P.(MD) No.2345 of 2017, on the file of
this Court.
____________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.2042 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr.K.Bala Subramanian for R1
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE]
We have heard Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government
Pleader, appearing for the appellants and Mr.K.Balasubramanian, learned
counsel for the first respondent / writ petitioner.
2. The first respondent / writ petitioner has challenged the
communication dated 29.11.2016, wherein the relief sought for by her was not
approved and she was not granted the benefit of incentive increment. The
learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition.
3. Learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the leave
was not obtained with due permission from the Management of the School and
the Government had not approved the same.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned Single Judge observed that the eligibility of the first
respondent to get incentive increment and to get leave salary for the period
she underwent B.Ed. course after getting permission from the management, is
not disputed. The case of the present appellants is that the first respondent
did not obtain leave from the Secretary of the School. The incentive increment
is to be granted on acquiring higher qualification. The same is not the
debatable issue.
5. The learned Single Judge, considering the entire gravamen of the
matter, passed the following order:
“6.Having regard to the facts narrated and discussed
above, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition in the
following lines:
(i)This Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned
order passed by the second respondent, dated
29.11.2016 is quashed. The second respondent is
directed to grant incentive increment to the petitioner
for having acquired B.Ed., degree, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
(ii)However, it is open to the second respondent to
hold an enquiry with regard to the genuineness of the
certificates produced by the petitioner to get incentive
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
increment. In case, if it is found that the petitioner has
produced a bogus or the certificate produced by the
petitioner is not genuine, this order directing the
respondent to grant incentive increment can be
ignored.
(iii)The second respondent is directed to approve
182 days leave taken by the petitioner to study
B.Ed., course from 11.02.2010 to 04.04.2012. No
costs.”
6. We do not find any error in the Judgment of the learned Single
Judge.
7. The writ appeal, accordingly, stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[S.V.G., .C.J.] [L.V.G., J.]
01.12.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
krk
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
krk
and
01.12.2023
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
