_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE : 07.08.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P. NO. 31332 OF 2013
I.Mariya Joseph .. Petitioner
- Vs -
1. The Director of School Education
DPI Campus, College Road
Chennai 600 006.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer
Villupuram District, Villupuram.
3. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Vikravandi Block
Villupuram District, Villupuram. .. Respondents
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
this Court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records
relating to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent in O.M.U. No.1866/A1/2012 and
quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to setp up the scale of
pay of the petitioner on par with his junior Tmt. K.Sumathi, B.T. Assistant with
retrospective effect with all consequential and other attendant benefits including
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
arrears of salary within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
For Petitioner : Mr. G.Sankaran
For Respondents : Mr. S.Suresh Kumar, GA
ORDER
It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Secondary Grade
Teacher on 6.10.88 and had obtained various promotions and incentive
increments. It is the further case of the petitioner that one Tmt. K.Sumathi, was
appointed as B.T. Assistant, subsequent to the petitioner, on 1.12.88 and she too
obtained various promotions and incentive increments. It is the case of the
petitioner that the incentive increments obtained by the petitioner were even
prior to the incentive increments obtained by the said Sumathi. It is further
averred by the petitioner that the said Sumathi got promotion to the post of B.T.
Assistant after reaching selection grade in the lower post and further she was
given incentive increment for M.A. after getting revision of pay as per VI Pay
Commission recommendations and, by virtue of the same, she draws salary
higher than the petitioner, though she is junior in service. In this regard, the
petitioner submitted a representation for stepping up his scale of pay on par with
his junior as per Fundamental Rules, which was rejected by the 3rd respondent by
the impugned proceedings. Against the said order, the present writ petition has
2/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
been filed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while reiterating the
grounds advanced in the petition, submitted that the Fundamental Rules
prescribe that the pay of the senior, if lower than the junior, ought to be stepped
up equivalent to the junior and specific reference is drawn to Rule 9 of the Special
Rules. It is submitted that the respondents have not considered the
representation of the petitioner in proper perspective and, therefore, the said
order requires interference at the hands of this Court.
3. On the above contentions, this Court heard the learned Government
Advocate, who submitted that the respondents have taken into consideration the
Fundamental Rules as also the Special Rules, while rejecting the claim of the
petitioner and that the petitioner was not entitled for stepping up of his pay
scale, as the said Sumathi received her selection grade pay in the lower post and
in such circumstances her pay was fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.15,600-39,100 –
GP 5,400. It is the further contention of the learned Government Advocate that
the said Sumathi hails from Arni Block, and came to the unit of Vikravandi Union
and hence, she cannot be compared as junior to the petitioner. Further, the
3/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
petitioner has not fulfilled the conditions imposed in G.O. Ms. Nos.25, P&AR
Department dated 23.3.15 and G.O. Ms. No.234, Finance (PC) Dept., dated 1.6.09.
Further, the petitioner and the alleged junior were holding different posts having
different scales of pay on various dates and extending the concession of fixation
of pay on par with the junior does not arise. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of
the present petition.
4. The facts in issue are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the
alleged junior to the petitioner, viz., Sumathi, hails from Arni Unit and on transfer,
she has joined Vikravandi Unit, where the petitioner is working. Further, the
affidavit of the petitioner itself reveals that the petitioner and the said Sumathi
have received various promotions and incentive increments on different dates.
Further the said Sumathi had received the selection grade pay before her
promotion as B.T. Assistant.
5. In the case of K.Muthumari – Vs – Director of Elementary Education &
Ors. (W.P. (MD) No.19969/2014 – Dated 8.1.18), learned single Judge of this
Court, in identical circumstances, has held as under :-
3. ...... The fourth respondent was appointed as Secondary
Grade Teacher as early as on 29.07.1988. On the other hand, the
4/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
petitioner got appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on
28.02.1990. It is true that the fourth respondent had joined in
Kamuthi Union later in point of time. The petitioner as well as
the fourth respondent got promoted as Elementary School
Headmistresses on 29.11.1999. Though, the petitioner as well as
the fourth respondent got promoted as Elementary School
Headmistresses on 29.11.1999, the fourth respondent had
attained the selection Grade for the 3 post of Secondary Grade
Teacher on 29.07.1998 itself. Thus, on the date of promotion to
the post of Elementary School Headmistress, the fourth
respondent was already holding the Selection Grade. That is to
say, she got promotion, after she got the selection grade. On the
other hand, the petitioner got promotion as Headmistress within
a time span of nine years, i.e., before getting selection grade.
Thus pay-fixation for both cannot be same. The petitioner
cannot claim stepping up of her pay on par with the fourth
respondent, on the ground that the fourth respondent is junior
to her in Kamudi Panchayat Union. Pay anomaly is clearly
explainable. There is no merit in this writ petition.”
6. In the present case, the alleged junior, viz., Sumathi, had obtained
selection grade scale of pay prior to her promotion as B.T. Assistant and,
accordingly, her pay was fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.15,600 – 39,100 – GP
5,400 pursuant to the VI Pay Commission Recommendation. The said fact is not
disputed by the petitioner. In such a backdrop, the ratio laid down in
5/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
Muthumari's case (supra) squarely stands attracted to the case on hand. Further,
the conditions as enumerated in G.O. Ms. Nos.25, P&AR Department dated
23.3.15 and G.O. Ms. No.234, Finance (PC) Dept., dated 1.6.09 have also not been
fulfilled by the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim stepping up
of his salary to that of the said Sumathi.In such view of the matter, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the order passed by the respondents rejecting the
claim of the petitioner for stepping up his scale of pay does not call for any
interference.
7. Accordingly, for the reasons aforesaid, this writ petition fails and the
same is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
07.08.2020
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
GLN
6/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
To
1. The Director of School Education
DPI Campus, College Road
Chennai 600 006.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer
Villupuram District, Villupuram.
3. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Vikravandi Block
Villupuram District, Villupuram.
7/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
_________
W.P. No.31332/2013
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
GLN
W.P. NO. 31332 OF 2013
07.08.2020
8/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
