Madras High Court
A.Sankar vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 30 January, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:30.01.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
1.A.Sankar
2.S.Appadurai
3.K.S.Prakasam
4.K.Murugesan
5.A.Thavamaniselvam
6.S.Balamurugan
7.Tamil Nadu Indainilai Aasiriyar Sangam,
Rep. by its General Secretary,
Mr.A.Sankar,
4/448, A.K.Nagar, Kanjirankal
Sivagangai District. ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary to the Government,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 9.
2.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
3.The Director of School Education,
DPI Compound,
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
4.The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
5.The Joint Director of School Education(Secondary),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents
Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to revise
the scale of pay of the petitioners on par with the B.Ed., qualified
Teachers/B.T.Assistants working in Government High Schools and
Government Higher Secondary Schools who are taking classes for
Standards VI to VIII with effect from 01.06.2006 with all consequential
benefits in view of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in
State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh reported in AIR 2016 SC 5176 within the
time period stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy,
Senior Counsel for
Mr.S.Rajasekar
For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjad Khan,
Government Advocate
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to revise
the scale of pay of the petitioners on par with the B.Ed., qualified
Teachers/B.T.Assistants working in Government High Schools and
Government Higher Secondary Schools, who are taking classes for
Standards VI to VIII with effect from 01.06.2006 with all consequential
benefits in view of the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in
State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh reported in AIR 2016 SC 5176 within a
specified period.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are working as Secondary
Grade Assistants in Government Higher Secondary Schools. As per
G.O.Ms.No.79 School Education Department, dated 14.06.2002 and as
per G.O.Ms.No.100 School Education Department, dated 27.06.2003, the
Post of Secondary Grade Teacher taking classes for VI to VIII standards
as Graduate Teachers to be filled up with B.Ed., qualified teachers and
further, it was ordered that the post of B.T.Assistant Teacher is
downgraded as Junior Grade Teacher on consolidated pay. Accordingly,
several thousands of junior grade graduate teachers were appointed in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
High and Higher Secondary School to take classes for standards VI to
VIII in the vacancy arose to the post of SGT, on upgradation of post.
The period of service on consolidated pay as Junior Grade Teacher was
fixed as five years from the date of initial appointment. However,
subsequently, the Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.99 dated
27.06.2006 as per which, the consolidated pay Junior Grade Graduate
Teachers have been brought into regular time scale of pay for the post of
B.T.Assistant with effect from 01.06.2006 even before completion of five
years of service as stipulated earlier. Under these circumstances, there
are two sets of teachers taking classes for standards VI to VIII in High
and Higher Secondary Schools in the State of Tamil Nadu namely
Secondary Grade Teachers and B.Ed., qualified Teachers (B.T. Assistant)
with different scale of pay. In order to step up the scale of pay of the
petitioners on par with the B.Ed., qualified Teachers/B.T.Assistants, the
petitioners made a representation on 27.11.2019 and the same was not
considered. Hence, the petitioners have filed this writ petition with the
aforesaid prayer.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit
that it would suffice, if the second respondent, is directed to consider the
representation of the petitioners, dated 27.11.2019, on merits and in
accordance with law, within a specified period.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents, has no serious objection for such an order being passed by
this Court.
5. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for
the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter,
directs the second respondent, to consider the petitioners' representation,
dated 27.11.2019 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in
accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
No costs.
30.01.2023
pm
NCC:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
To:
1.The Principal Secretary to the Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 9.
2.The Principal Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
School Education Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
3.The Director of School Education,
DPI Compound,
College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
4.The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
5.The Joint Director of School Education(Secondary),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
pm
W.P.(MD)No.13568 of 2020
30.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
