Madras High Court
R.Murugan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 2 September, 2024
Author: Abdul Quddhose
Bench: Abdul Quddhose
W.P.(MD) No.12139 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD) No.12139 of 2021
R.Murugan ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary to Government
Finance Department
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009
2.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by Secretary to Government
School Education Department
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009
3.The Director of School Education
DPI Compound, College Road
Chennai-600 006
4.The Joint Director (Vocational)
Directorate of School Education
DPI Compound, College Road
Chennai-600 006 ... Respondents
____________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.12139 of 2021
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue
a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to re-fix the scale of pay of the
petitioner at Rs.2000-3500 w.e.f. 16.10.1992 on par with the scale of pay
sanctioned to Mr.Narayanasami under G.O.Ms.No.327 dated 18.11.2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Saravanan
For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjad Khan
Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus seeking for a
direction to the respondents to refix the scale of pay of the petitioner at
Rs.2000-3500, with effect from 16.10.1992, on par with the scale of pay
sanctioned to Mr.Narayanasami, under G.O.Ms.No.327, School Education
Department, dated 18.11.2013.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per G.O.Ms.No.840,
Finance (Pay Commission) Department, dated 31.07.1990, he ought to have
been treated on par with one Mr.Narayanasami, as per the scale of pay fixed
for him under G.O.Ms.No.327, School Education Department, dated
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
18.11.2013. The petitioner claims that the work that was done by him, while
he was in employment, was the same as that of the said Mr.Narayanasami
and on the ground of Equal Work Equal Pay principle, he claims that similar
scale of pay, as fixed for Mr.Narayanasami under G.O.Ms.No.327, School
Education Department, dated 18.11.2013, has to be fixed for him also.
3. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit denying the
contentions of the petitioner and they would submit that since the said
Narayanasami was qualified in agriculture, as he has completed B.Sc.,
(Agriculture) Course, the petitioner cannot be equated with him, who is having
educational qualification of only B.Com., and M.Com. They have contended
that B.Sc., (Agriculture) Course is a four year course and it is a professional
course and therefore, since the petitioner has not completed professional
course, he is not entitled to get the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.840, Finance (Pay
Commission) Department, dated 31.07.1990, referred to supra.
4. This writ petition is of the year 2021. Admittedly, no final order
has been passed by the respondents in the representation of the petitioner
submitted prior to the filing of this writ petition.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon certain
authorities, including the Division Bench Judgment of this Court, in support
of his contention that the prayer sought for in this writ petition will have to be
granted.
6. However, learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents has also placed reliance upon certain authorities and would
submit that the prayer sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted.
7. No prejudice will be caused to the respondents, if the
petitioner's representation with regard to the relief sought for in this writ
petition is considered on merits and in accordance with law, within a time
frame to be fixed by this Court.
8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the petitioner to
submit a fresh representation to the first respondent seeking to refix his scale
of pay at Rs.2000-3500, with effect from 16.10.1992, on par with the scale of
pay sanctioned to Mr.Narayanasami, under G.O.Ms.No.327, School Education
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Department, dated 18.11.2013, within a period of two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said representation, the first
respondent shall pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law,
within a period of four months thereafter.
9. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No
costs.
02.09.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
krk
To:
1.The Secretary to Government,
Finance Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
3.The Director of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.The Joint Director (Vocational),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
krk
02.09.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
