Madras High Court
N.Swaminathan vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 5 September, 2023
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
W.P.(MD)No.616 of 2019
N.Swaminathan ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Education Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 9.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 6.
3.The Chief Educational Officer,
Kanyakumari District,
Nagercoil. ....Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling
for the records relating to the proceedings of the third respondent in
Na.Ka.No.950/EE2/2013, dated 24.10.2018 and quash the same and direct
the respondents to grant higher grade/special grade to the petitioner in
terms of G.O.(Ms)No.216 Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
22.03.1993 and G.O.(Ms)No.304 Finance (Pay Commission) Department,
dated 26.03.1990.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthuvel
For Respondents : Mr.V.Nirmal Kumar,
Government Advocate
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government
Advocate for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Higher
Grade Teacher on 04.01.1965. He was promoted as Secondary Grade Teacher
on 01.09.1988 and posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Edalakudi
at Nagercoil. He was awarded Selection Grade in the year 1997 and retired in
the year 2002 while he was working in Government High School,
Meenakshipuram at Nagercoil. He worked in the Government High School
from 01.09.1988.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per
G.O.(Ms)No.216, Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
22.03.1993, the Secondary Grade Teachers, who were working in the High
Schools till 28.03.1990, are eligible for promotion as Primary School
Headmasters. They are eligible to get higher Grade / Special Grade as per
G.O.Ms.No.304, Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.03.1990.
The learned counsel would further submit that the Government had granted
Special Grade to several Secondary Grade Teachers, who were working in the
High Schools till 28.03.1990. Accordingly, the petitioner made a
representation to the third respondent on 10.09.2018 claiming similar benefits.
The third respondent by proceedings, dated 24.10.2018, rejected the
representation of the petitioner on the ground that the Secondary Grade
Teachers, who had obtained the Court orders alone are eligible for similar
benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
4. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit has been filed by
the third respondent.
5. The learned Government Advocate would submit basing on the
averments made in the counter affidavit that, the Full Bench of this Court while
disposing of the Review Application No.227 of 2015 in W.A.No.352 of 2014
and batch, by judgment, dated 09.12.2016, made it clear that the benefits as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
directed in the Government Order shall be extended to the parties, who are
before this Court alone and no fresh writ petition would be entertained on or
after 09.12.2016.
6. The learned Government Advocate would further contend that in
pursuance of the orders in the writ appeal, dated 09.12.2016, the State
Government issued G.O.Ms.No.90, School Education SE3(1) Department,
dated 09.05.2018, to implement the directions of the High Court. The learned
Government Advocate further submits that as the petitioner is not a party in the
said batch of litigation, he is not entitled for the relief sought for in this writ
petition.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a Division
Bench of this Court by its judgment, dated 23.09.2019 in W.A.No.3290 of
2019, in an identical matter, has set aside the order of the learned Single Judge
passed in the writ petition and allowed the writ appeal, directing to pay the
amount due to the appellant therein within two weeks.
8. In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed
reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Utter Pradesh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
and others v. Arvind Kumar Srivastava and others reported in 2015 (1SCC)
347, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court dealt with the issue as to the entitlement
of judgment in rem with an intention to benefit all similarly situated persons
irrespective of whether they had approached the Court or not. In the said
judgment, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that when a particular set of employees
is given a relief by the Court, all other identically situated persons should be
treated alike by extending the same benefit, since not doing so would amount to
discrimination and be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
9. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
fully agree with the proposition of law laid down in the said judgment by the
Hon’ble Apex Court.
10. In the present case, the contention of the respondents for not
considering the claim of the petitioner is that the petitioner did not approach the
Court by filing cases along with other persons, who approached this Court
earlier. Now, in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court stated
supra, there is no substance in the contention of the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
11. It is an admitted fact that all other similarly situated persons are
granted the benefit vide G.O.(Ms)No.90,School Education SE3(1) Department,
dated 09.05.2018 in compliance of the orders of the Full Bench in Review
Application No.227 of 2015 in W.A.No.352 of 2014 and batch, by judgment,
dated 09.12.2016.
12. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner is entitled
for the same benefit and as such, there is no merit in the impugned order and
accordingly, it is liable to be set aside.
13. For the above said reasons, this writ petition is allowed with the
following directions:
(i)The proceedings of the third respondent in
Na.Ka.No.950/EE2/2013, dated 24.10.2018, is hereby set aside.
(ii)The respondents are directed to grant Higher Grade / Special
Grade to the petitioner in terms of G.O.(Ms)No.216 Finance (Pay
Commission) Department, dated 22.03.1993 and G.O.(Ms)No.304 Finance
(Pay Commission) Department, dated 26.03.1990.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
(iii)The amount due and payable to the petitioner shall be sanctioned
within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
14. No costs.
05.09.2023
Index : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
PM
To,
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Education Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 9.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 6.
3.The Chief Educational Officer,
Kanyakumari District,
Nagercoil.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.616 of 2019
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
PM
W.P.(MD)No.616 of 2019
05.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
