Madras High Court
Kalaiarasi vs The Government Of India on 22 November, 2023
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
W.P.(MD).No.20320 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 22.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.20320 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.14739, 14740 of 2022 and 3611 of 2023
Kalaiarasi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Government of India,
Represented by its Deputy Educational Adviser,
Ministry of Human Resources Development,
Government of India,
New Delhi.
2. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education
Fort. St. George,
Chennai -9.
3. The Director of School Education,
Office of the Director of School Education,
DPI Campus,
Chennai-6.
4. The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel)
Office of the Joint Director of School Education (Personnel)
DPI Campus,
Chennai – 6.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.20320 of 2022
5.The Chief Educational Officer,
Office of the Chief Educational Office,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
6.The District Educational Officer,
Office of the District Educational Officer,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
7. The Secretary,
Cum Correspondent,
Kshatriya Nadar Girls Higher Secondary School,
Kamuthi,
Ramanathapurm District.
8. The Regional Accounts Officer (Audit),
School Education,
Tallakulam,
Madurai – 625 002. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records
pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.Nil dated .08.2022 served on
the petitioner on 23.08.2022 on the file of the seventh respondent and quash
the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimman
For Respondents : Mr.D.Saravanan
CGSC – for R1
: Mr.V.Om Prakash
Government Advocate
For R-2 to R6 and R8
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.20320 of 2022
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed by a Vocational Instructor
(Commerce) challenging the order passed by the seventh respondent herein
dated ...08.2022, wherein, the petitioner's incentive increment is sought to
be cancelled on the ground that the petitioner has undergone M.Phil course
in an un-approved institution.
2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner,
the petitioner was appointed as Vocational Instructor (Commerce) in the
year 1993. The petitioner had joined M.Phil, (Commerce) in Vinayaga
Mission University, Salem (Deemed University) through correspondence
course and obtained M.Phil Degree in the year 2008. Based upon the said
higher qualification, the incentive increment was conferred upon the writ
petitioner from 18.08.2010.
3. Under the impugned order, the incentive increment that was
granted to the writ petitioner from 18.08.2010 was sought to be recovered
on the ground that M.Phil Degree was granted by Vinayaka Mission
University through Distance Education has not been approved by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Government and therefore, on the said Degree, the incentive increment
ought not to have been granted to the writ petitioner from 18.08.2010.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner brought to
the notice of the Court, the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court, in a batch of writ appeals in W.A.Nos.2328 of 2018 etc., dated
04.08.2023, (Mr.S.Sivan Vs. The Regional Accounts Officer, (Audit)
Department of School Education, Coimbatore and others), wherein,
Paragraph No.24 of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court is pleased to
point out that between 2007 to 2012, Vinayaka Mission University was
given institution wise recognition by the UGC and therefore, the Teachers,
who had joined the Course either in the year 2007 or in the year 2008 and
completed either in the year 2008 or in the year 2009, have been granted a
valid Degree.
5. In view of the above said facts of the present case, the judgment of
the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court is squarely applicable to the facts
of the present case, in view of the fact that the petitioner had passed out in
the year 2008.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. In view of the above said deliberations, the order impugned in the
writ petition is set aside and the writ petition stands allowed. The
respondents are directed to continue to pay the incentive increment for the
petitioner. If any amount had been recovered from the petitioner, the same
shall be refunded to the writ petitioner within a period of twelve weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions stand closed.
22.11.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ebsi
To
1. The Deputy Educational Adviser,
Ministry of Human Resources Development,
Government of India,
New Delhi.
2. The Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education
Fort. St. George,
Chennai -9.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The Director of School Education,
Office of the Director of School Education,
DPI Campus,
Chennai-6.
4. The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel)
Office of the Joint Director of School Education (Personnel)
DPI Campus,
Chennai – 6.
5.The Chief Educational Officer,
Office of the Chief Educational Office,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
6.The District Educational Officer,
Office of the District Educational Officer,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
7. The Regional Accounts Officer (Audit),
School Education,
Tallakulam, Madurai – 625 002.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
ebsi
22.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
