Madras High Court
A.Seenivasakan vs The Director Of Medical Education on 4 September, 2025
Author: Abdul Quddhose
Bench: Abdul Quddhose
2025:MHC:2144
W.P.(MD) No.13820 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD) No.13820 of 2021
A.Seenivasakan ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Director of Medical Education
Chennai-10
2.The Director Medical and
Rural Health Services
Thenampet, Madras-6
3.The Dean
Government Medical College Hospital
Dindigul
4.The Joint Director
Government Head Quarters Hospital
Dindigul ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue
a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records connected with the
impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1901/Ni3/2021
dated 28.06.2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the
respondent to pay the salary of the petitioner for the Promotion Post of Plaster
____________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
W.P.(MD) No.13820 of 2021
Technician with effect from 09.12.2014 being the date of joining in the
Promotion Post as per the proceedings of the 4th respondents dated
04.12.2014 with monetary and other service benefits in terms of Rules 22B of
the Fundamental Rules and in the light of the Division Bench Judgment of
this High Court reported in 2013(2) LLN 256 dated 28.02.2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Govindan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order,
dated 28.06.2021, passed by the third respondent, rejecting the petitioner's
request for payment of salary for the promotion post of Plaster Technician with
effect from 09.12.2014, which is the date of the petitioner's joining in the
promotion post.
2. Under the impugned order, the petitioner's request has been
rejected, on the ground that he was only transferred to the promotion post
from the feeder category and he was never promoted from the feeder category
to the promotion post. Admittedly, the petitioner has been working in the
promotion post from 09.12.2014 till the date of his retirement i.e., on
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
30.06.2022. The same has also not been disputed by the respondents, as
seen from the counter affidavit filed before this Court.
3. The only objection raised by the respondents, as seen from the
impugned order as well as from the counter affidavit filed before this Court, is
that the petitioner was never promoted from the feeder category to the
promotion post, but, he was asked to work in the promotion post by way of
transfer. Further, in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, the
respondents have stated that the petitioner does not have the requisite
qualification to hold the promotion post of Plaster Technician either through
promotion or through direct recruitment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this
Court to the following authorities in support of his contention that once a
Government servant is asked to work in the promotion post, he is entitled to
get salary in the promotion post, whether the Government servant was
promoted or appointed by way of direct recruitment:
(a) A Single Bench Judgment of the Madras High Court,
dated 02.08.2011, passed in W.P.No.13431 of 2007 in
the case of T.Thangaraj vs. The Secretary to
Government, and reported in 2011 (5) LLN 341 (Mad).
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
(b) A Division Bench Judgment of the Madras High Court,
dated 28.02.2013, passed in W.A.No.301 of 2013, in the
case of State of Tamil Nadu vs. C.K.Velayuthan Nair,
reported in 2013 (2) LLN 256 (DB) (Mad.).
(c) A Single Bench Order of the Madras High Court, dated
04.04.2014, passed in W.P.(MD) No.5801 of 2012, in the
case of N.Murugan vs. The Secretary to Government
of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration and Water
Supplies Department and others.
5. Relying upon the aforesaid authorities, learned counsel for the
petitioner would submit that the petitioner is entitled for salary in the
promotion post, where he has been working from 09.12.2014 till the date of
his retirement i.e., on 30.06.2022 i.e., for nearly eight years.
6. On the other hand, learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents would reiterate the contents of the counter
affidavit filed by the respondents before this Court and would reiterate the
contents of the impugned order.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
7. As seen from the authorities relied upon by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, referred to supra, it is clear that the petitioner is entitled for
salary, while he was working as a Plaster Technician, which is a promotion
post from 09.12.2014 till the date of his retirement i.e., on 30.06.2022 for the
following reasons:
(a) The pay for the higher post is admissible when an
employee is looking after the duties of that post,
though he is not treated as promoted.
(b) An agreement that if a person is promoted to the
higher post or put to officiate on that post or, as in the
instant case, a stop-gap arrangement is made to place
him on the higher post, he should not claim higher
salary or other attendant benefits would be contrary to
law and also against public policy. It would, therefore,
be unenforceable in view of Section 23 of the Contract
Act, 1872.
(c) Equal pay for equal work is now recognized as a
fundamental right.
(d) It is not the pleaded case of the respondents nor any
material has been produced before this Court to show
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
that the petitioner has not been discharging the duties
of the promoted post of Plaster Technician or the
degree of his responsibility is different from other
Plaster Technicians.
8. The aforesaid propositions have been culled out from the
decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Madras
High Court, while rendering those decisions, has also followed various
decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court for coming to such a conclusion.
9. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view
that arbitrarily by total non-application of mind to the settled position of law
that a Government servant is entitled for salary, in case he has been posted to
the promotion post from the feeder category, though without actually
promoting him to the promotion post or appointing him through direct
recruitment, the impugned order has been passed rejecting the petitioner's
request for payment of salary in the promotion post.
10. In the result, the impugned order, dated 28.06.2021, passed
by the third respondent, is hereby quashed and this writ petition is allowed by
directing the third respondent to pay salary to the petitioner, who was working
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
in the promotion post of Plaster Technician as per the scale of pay payable to
Plaster Technician with effect from 09.12.2014 till the date of his retirement
i.e., on 30.06.2022, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. No costs.
04.09.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
krk
To:
1.The Director of Medical Education,
Chennai-10.
2.The Director Medical and
Rural Health Services,
Thenampet, Madras-6.
3.The Dean,
Government Medical College Hospital,
Dindigul.
4.The Joint Director,
Government Head Quarters Hospital,
Dindigul.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
krk
04.09.2025
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/09/2025 03:43:32 pm )
