Madras High Court
G.Vetriselvi vs The Director Of Elementary ... on 21 July, 2023
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.07.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
G.Vetriselvi .. Petitioner
vs
1.The Director of Elementary Education,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Villupuram District.
3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer,
Rishivanthiyam,
Villupuram District. .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the
records issued by the 2nd respondent Na.Ka.No.4327/A3/2017
dated 31.10.2017 to quash the same and consequently permit the
petitioner to resubmit their representation and further issue
direction to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the claim of the
petitioner's proposal, in light of judgment of W.P.No.3698 of 2007
and batch, within a time frame and pass such further or other
orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances
of the case.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Panchatsaram
For Respondents : Mr.R.Neethiperumal
Government Advocate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
ORDER
Writ petition has been filed in the nature of a certiorarified
mandamus seeking the records issued by the 2nd respondent
Na.Ka.No.4327/A3/2017 dated 31.10.2017 to quash the same and
consequently permit the petitioner to re-submit their
representation and issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to
reconsider the claim of the petitioner's proposal in the light of the
judgment dated 18.06.2012 made in WP No. 3698 of 2007 and
batch.
2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it
had been stated by the petitioner that she was appointed as
Secondary Grade Teacher on 13.12.1990 in Ulundurpettai Block,
Panchayat Union Elementary School, Kattuedyar. On 27.09.2004,
she got transferred to Rishvandhiam Union and was promoted as
Graduate Teacher on 02.06.2008.
3. In the affidavit, it is further stated that her junior /
R.Sathasivam, was initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher
on 14.12.2000 in Vallam Union and he got promoted as Graduate
Teacher on 20.12.2012.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due
to VII pay commission, an anomaly in pay was caused. The
petitioner sent a representation to the official respondent on
28.09.2017 for stepping up of her pay on par with her junior /
R.Sathasivam. Along with the representation, the petitioner had
also made a detailed comparative statement. Learned counsel for
the petitioner further submitted that the said proposal was
returned vide communication dated 31.10.2017 stating that since
the petitioner and her junior / R.Sathasivam were from different
unions, the claim made by the petitioner cannot be considered.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a judgment
of a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of T.Mani and
others v The District Elementary Educational Officer [W.P.Nos.
3698 to 3700 of 2007 dated 18.06.2012]. Though it is a settled
position of law, this Court also had an occasion to consider a
similar set of facts in W.P.No. 12504 of 2017 and had allowed the
writ petition.
6. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for
the respondents submitted that the petitioner had been transferred
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
from one unit to another unit. The respondents had compared the
grade pay of both the petitioner and her junior / R.Sathasivam
while determining the pay matrix. The learned Government
Advocate further stated that the official respondents had carefully
gone through the records and had come to the conclusion that
there was no pay anomaly as claimed by the petitioner and sought
dismissal of the petition.
7. Heard learned counsels on either side.
8. This Court is of the considered view that the anomaly
in pay had occurred due to the implementation of the
recommendations of the VII pay commission and the petitioner is
entitled for stepping up of pay. The contention raised by learned
Government Advocate for the respondents that stepping up of pay
will not be applicable to those who were transferred from one unit
to another unit is rejected since this is a case of drawing of pay
and equalizing the pay scale to that of the junior. The transfer from
one union to another union would affect seniority but it would not
be applicable so far as fixation of pay is concerned.
9. The writ petition stands allowed. A mandamus is issued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
to the respondents to issue necessary proceedings within a period
of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If
the respondents require any clarification, they may issue notice to
the petitioner herein and seek necessary clarification and but at
any rate pass orders within the period of four months. No costs.
Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
21.07.2023
Index:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
ssm
To
1.The Director of Elementary Education,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Villupuram District.
3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer,
Rishivanthiyam,
Villupuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
ssm
W.P.No.32205 of 2019
21.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
