The Director Of Elementary ... vs J.Shanthi Pushpakumari
2023 Latest Caselaw 9049 Mad

                                                                         W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED : 26.07.2023

                                                      CORAM

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
                                             AND
                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                            W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023
                                                    and
                                           C.M.P(MD)No.8877 of 2023

                     1.The Director of Elementary Education,
                       College Road, Chennai 006.

                     2.The District Educational Officer,
                       Office of the District Educational Office,
                       Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

                     3.The Block Development Officer-I,
                       Office of the Block Development Office,
                       Paramakudi-SB401,
                       Ramanathapuram District.          : Appellants/Respondents 1 to 3


                                                        Vs.



                     1.J.Shanthi Pushpakumari
                       Headmistress,
                       TELC Primary School,
                       Venkittankurichi,
                       Paramakudi,

                     1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

                        Ramanathapuram District.                  : 1st Respondent/Writ Petitioner


                     2.The Correspondent,
                       TELC Primary School,
                       Venkittankurichi,
                       Paramakudi,
                       Ramanathapuram District.                   : 2nd Respondent/4th Respondent

                     Prayer:
                                  Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
                     order dated 10.01.2023 passed in W.P(MD)No.2719 of 2020 on the file
                     of this Court.


                                        For Appellant           : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
                                                                  Additional Government Pleader

                                        For R1                  : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar


                                                        JUDGMENT

(order of the Court was made by D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.)

This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single

Judge of this Court, dated 10.01.2023 made in W.P(MD)No.2719 of

2020. By the said order, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ

petition filed by the respondents herein thereby setting aside the order

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

impugned in the writ petition and directing the respondents to grant

incentive increment for the petitioner for acquiring higher qualification

ie., M.A. degree. By the order impugned in the writ petition dated

10.09.2019, the request of the petitioner for grant of incentive increment

for acquiring of higher qualification stood rejected. The incentive

increment was rejected on the ground that when the petitioner originally

possessed B.A., and B.Ed., degrees and was however appointed as

Secondary Grade Teacher, she had given an undertaking that she will not

claim any incentive for possessing higher qualification.

2. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner was initially

appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 29.04.1998 and at that time,

she had possessed B.A. History and B.Ed. degree. The qualification

prescribed for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher is only a pass in

Teacher Training Course. However, since the petitioner with qualification

of B.T. Assistant was appointed with a special permission at the time of

approval of appointment, an undertaking has been taken from the

petitioner that she will not claim any incentive increment for possessing

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

higher qualifications. But however, after appointment, she subsequently

completed M.A. degree in History in the year 2013 and when incentive

has been claimed for the said degree, the same was rejected based on the

undertaking. Since the higher qualification ie., B.A., and B.Ed., were

taken in lieu of the original qualification of possessing Teacher Training

Course, an undertaking was obtained from the petitioner. But however,

that cannot be applied for further higher qualification obtained thereafter.

This issue was already considered and answered by this Court in

W.A(MD)No.511 of 2011- State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Louis Rani and the

Special Leave Petition preferred by the respondents was also dismissed

and thereafter, the said judgment was implemented. Thereafter, the said

dictum has been followed specifically in other cases. Therefore, the

learned Single Judge of this Court following the said ratio allowed the

writ petition.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf

of the appellants has no answer in respect of the above legal position.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

4. In view thereof, finding no merits, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[S.S.S.R., J.] [D.B.C., J.] 26.07.2023 sji NCC : Yes / No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.

sji

W.A(MD)No.1162 of 2023 and C.M.P(MD)No.8877 of 2023

26.07.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis