Madras High Court
K.Govindan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 January, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
2024:MHC:5622
W.P.No.26243 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Orders reserved on : 19.12.2023
Orders pronounced on : 04.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.26243 of 2011
and M.P.No.1 of 2011
K.Govindan .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Finance (CMPC) Department,
Chennai – 9.
2. The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Chennai – 600 009.
3. The Works Manager,
Police Transport Workshop-cum-
Training School, TSP Camp, Avadi,
Chennai – 54. .. Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/15
W.P.No.26243 of 2011
praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records relating to
first respondent proceeding in Letter No.001462 / CMPC / 199-3, dated
07.03.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondent to upgrade
petitioner from respective Grade – II to Grade – I post and revise the scale of
pay and grant monitory benefits on par with other categories on the line of
G.O.Ms.No.731 Finance (Pay cell) Department, dated 29.08.1994 with
further revisions made in G.O.Ms.No.456 Finance (Pay cell) Department,
dated 31.08.1998.
*Prayer amended as per order, dated 16.12.2011 in M.P.No.2 of 2011 in
W.P.No.26243 of 2011.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan
For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthuswamy,
Government Advocate
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed for issue of a Certiorarified Mandamus
calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent,
dated 07.03.2011 and to quash the same and consequently, to re-designate
the petitioner from respective Grade - II to Grade - I post and revise the scale
of pay and grant monetary benefits on par with the other categories in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
light of G.O.Ms.No.731 Finance (Pay cell) Department, dated 29.08.1994
with further revisions made in G.O.Ms.No.456 Finance (Pay cell)
Department, dated 31.08.1998.
2. The brief facts of the case are that there are various trade and
technical posts in the Police Transport Workshop and recruitment to the said
posts are governed by the Ad-hoc Rules framed vide G.O.Ms.No.1111,
Home (Police-XIII) Department, dated 04.05.1985. The petitioner possesses
the educational qualification of PUC and also had I.T.I certificate in the
trade of ‘Mechanic Motor Vehicles’. On 05.10.1987, the petitioner was
further promoted as Electrician Grade - II and again was promoted as
Electrician Grade - I on 13.07.2005. The scales of pay in respect of the
various technical posts had undergone revision during the implementation of
IV pay commission recommendations and subsequently as follows :-
Name Scale of Scale of pay Revision of Revision Scale of
pay with with effect pay scale of pay pay with
effect from from with effect scale with effect from
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
01.10.84 01.06.88 as from effect from 01.01.96 as
as per per G.O.666 01.06.88 as 01.06.88 as per
G.O.555 Fin (PC) per per G.O.162
Fin (PC) dt.27.06.1989 G.O.562 G.O.731 Fin (PC)
dt.10.06.85 Fin (PC) Fin (PC) dt.13.04.98
dt.01.08.92 dt.20.08.94
Electrician 555-970 825-1200 950-1500 -- 3050-4590
II
Fitter 555-970 825-1200 950-1500 1100-1660 4000-6000
Tinker 555-970 825-1200 -- 1100-1660 4000-6000
Painter 555-970 825-1200 950-1500 1100-1660 4000-6000
Electrician 610-1500 825-1200 1100-1660 -- 4000-6000
Grade - I
3. Firstly, vide G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated
01.08.1992, the scale of pay of Fitter Grade - II was revised as Rs.950-1500
along with the post of Electrician Grade - II based on the recommendation of
the Official Committee constituted by the Government. Thereafter, upon
receipt of several representations, the Government further constituted One
Man Commission to consider the grievances and certain practical
inconveniences in extending the revised scales of pay in certain categories in
Police Transport Workshop and after the report, the Government issued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.O.Ms.No.731 Finance (Pay cell) Department, dated 29.08.1994. By the
said Government Order, Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay
Rules, 1989 was amended, under which, the post of Helper was re-
designated as Fitter Grade - II. The post of Fitter Grade - II was further
upgraded as Fitter Grade - I and the scale of pay was upgraded as Rs.1100-
1600 with effect from 01.06.1988. Further, the Government issued
G.O.Ms.No.338 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010 after
constituting One Man Commission to examine the anomalies, by which, all
these posts are classified into Unskilled, Skilled Assistant Grade -II, Skilled
Assistant Grade - I, Special Artisan and Supervisor. The same was done
taking into account the qualification being the Higher Secondary and the
I.T.I certificate. The petitioner, therefore, claimed that when the post of
Fitter Grade - II was re-designated as Grade - I in the scale of pay of
Rs.1100-1600, the post of Electrician Grade - II cannot remain unchanged
and therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 08.05.1998.
Thereafter, through the association, the petitioner filed O.A.No.3392 of 1998
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and by order, dated 15.05.1998, by which, the respondents were directed to
consider their representation. By order, dated 23.09.1999, the said claim
was rejected by the Government. The petitioner, therefore, filed
O.A.No.7352 of 1999 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal which
was thereafter transferred and renumbered as W.P.No.48109 of 2006 and
once again by order, dated 15.02.2010, this Court disposed off the Writ
Petition with a direction to consider the representation by taking into
account the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of
Rajasthan Vs. Pateh Chand Son . However, the same was again rejected
by the impugned order, dated 07.03.2011 and challenging the same, the
present Writ Petition is filed.
4. This Writ Petition is resisted by the respondents by filing a detailed
counter-affidavit stating that it was part of the cadre restructuring and
rationalisation made by the Government and the pay scales of various posts
have been settled and at this belated point of time, it cannot be unsettled. It
1 1996 (1) ELR 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
is the further case of the respondents that when the petitioner has promotion
in the line of Electrician Grade - II, thereafter, he cannot turn back and claim
the benefits in the line of the other trade namely, the Motor Mechanic.
Therefore, they support the impugned order and pray that the Writ Petition
be dismissed.
5. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and
perused material records of the case.
6. It is for the employer to restructure / rationalise the cadre. The
cadre re-structuring and rationalisation of the pay scales vide
G.O.Ms.No.562 Financial (Pay Cell) Department, dated 01.08.1992,
G.O.Ms.No.731 Finance (Pay cell) Department, dated 29.08.1994 and
G.O.Ms.No.338 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010, per se,
cannot be found fault with. The respondents have specifically decided to
make the Electrician Grade - II as entry level post. Therefore, the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
cannot have any right to claim that the post of Electrician Grade - II should
also have been re-designated or upgraded as Grade - I. The upgradation and
re-designation / re-structuring of posts are done by the employer considering
the administrative exigencies and the work output in the Police Automobile
Workshop. The petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot claim any
upgradation of post or re-designation. At the same time, it has to be seen
that the petitioner possesses the qualification of P.U.C which is equivalent to
the Higher Secondary. He also possesses the I.T.I certificate in the trade of
‘Motor Mechanic’. The petitioner was originally appointed as Helper on
05.07.1984. Had he been continued in the same post, by virtue of
G.O.Ms.No.731 Finance (Pay cell) Department, dated 29.08.1994, he would
have been re-designated as Fitter Grade - II in the scale of pay of Rs.950-
1500 and consequently, as Fitter Grade - I in the scale of Rs.1100-1660 with
effect from 01.06.1988.
7. On the other hand, because of his promotion as Electrician Grade -
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
II, he reached the said scale only upon his further promotion as Electrician
Grade - I with effect from 13.07.2005. For no fault of the petitioner, the
persons juniors to him and are working as Helpers, were granted better
scales of pay. Further, it can be seen that G.O.Ms.No.338 Finance (Pay
Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010 further rationalised the posts taking into
account the Higher Secondary qualification and I.T.I trade certificate. The
petitioner possesses those two qualifications also. In that event, when there
is no fault of the petitioner, when there is anomaly in pay occurred to the
prejudice of the petitioner, when the petitioner possesses all the educational
and other qualifications, the grant and accepting of promotion cannot work
to the detriment of the petitioner. Therefore, while the respondent
Government is well within its jurisdiction in the matter of re-designation and
rationalisation of posts, but, however, if the same results in the pay anomaly
to persons like that of the petitioner who possesses all the educational
qualifications and experience, then the same has to be rectified by stepping
up the pay of the petitioner. Therefore, while the petitioner's prayer as such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
cannot be granted, the petitioner's grievance has to be redressed by stepping
up of his pay equivalent to the exact sum for which he would have been paid
had he not been promoted as Electrician Grade - II from the post of Helper
and had he been continued in the same post. The same can be Personal Pay
to the petitioner but shall form part of the emoluments for calculation of
pension. The relevant ruling under FR -19 of the Fundamental Rules of the
Government of Tamil Nadu, reads as follows :-
"(2) (a) An officer holding any post substantively
should not lose in his substantive pay on his promotion to
a higher post on the revised scale of pay. Under Rule 19, if
the substantive pay of an officer is higher than the
maximum of the new revised time-scale of pay of a post to
which he is promoted or the new revised pay of such post
if it is on a fixed rate of pay, the difference shall be made
good by the grant of personal pay. (b) In cases where a
Government servant, who is granted personal pay to make
good the loss in substantive pay on promotion from a
lower post to a higher post in the revised scale of pay, is
promoted to another higher post, the personal pay also
should be taken into account in fixing his pay in the third
higher post notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 9 (28).
Example. An officer drawing a substantive pay of Rs. 500
in the old scale of Rs. 300-500, was promoted
substantively to a higher post on the existing revised scale
of Rs. 300-50/2-450. His pay in the higher post was fixed
at Rs. 450 plus personal pay Rs. 50. He was again
promoted to a still higher post in the new revised scale of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rs. 415-35/2-520 and his pay in this post was fixed at
Rs.520, with reference to the above orders. (Memo. No.
24864-C.S.R.-1, Finance, dated 8th January 1943, memo.
No. 3085-C.S.R.-1, Finance, dated 9th February 1943,
Memo. No. 836-E-43-B-1-H-D, dated 18th January 1943
and G.O. No. 555, P.S., dated 28th March 1938.)"
8. At the same time, it can be seen that there is a huge delay in the
matter and repeated orders have been passed only for considering the
representation. Though in matters of revision of scale of pay, the delay itself
will not disentitle the petitioner, it has been held that the petitioner can be
permitted the arrears of pay depending on the facts and circumstances of the
case. Considering the extreme delay, the petitioner will not be entitled for
any arrears and but such pay granted to him shall be taken to account for
calculation of pension and actual financial benefits of revised higher pension
shall be granted prospectively from the date of this order. It is made clear
that any such exercise shall not result in any disadvantage to the petitioner.
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is partly allowed on the following
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
terms:-
(i) The impugned order of the first respondent, dated 07.03.2011 is set
aside inasmuch as the petitioner is concerned;
(ii) The petitioner's scale of pay in the post of Electrician Grade - II
shall be stepped up in the scale of Rs.1100-1660 with effect from
01.06.1988 and consequently, by re-fixing the scales in the appropriate level
under G.O.Ms.No.338 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010 and
his last drawn pay and pension shall be worked out;
(iii) The petitioner will not be entitled for any arrears and the same
shall be calculated and be given from the date of this order;
(iv) No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
04.01.2024
(2/2)
Index : yes
Speaking order
Neutral Citation : yes
grs
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
Finance (CMPC) Department,
Chennai – 9.
2. The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Chennai – 600 009.
3. The Works Manager,
Police Transport Workshop-cum-
Training School, TSP Camp, Avadi,
Chennai – 54.
4. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
grs
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
04.01.2024
(2/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
