Madras High Court
N.Dhanalakshmi vs The Secretary To Government on 6 August, 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCHOF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:06.08.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Writ Petition (MD)No.3117 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2012 N.Dhanalakshmi, D/o.Narayanasamy ... Petitioner vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Chennai. 2.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukottai. 3.The Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General, (Accounts & Entitlements), Chennai-18. ... Respondents Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of pertaining to the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent passed in his proceedings in Pension:32/7/FP/13204657 /10-11/ADK, dated 30.03.2011, quashing the same and consequently directing the 3rd respondent to pay the revised pay scale of the petitioner's husband, as per recommendation made by the 2nd respondent Na.Ka.No.1155 /A1/2009, dated 29.10.2010. !For Petitioner : Mr.Veera Kathiravan ^For Respondents : Mr.S.Kumar, 1&2 Addl.Govt.Pleader. For Respondent-3 : Mr.P.Gunasekaran :ORDER
The petitioner's husband, by name K.Kannan, was initially appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in Aranthangi Panchayat Union Elementary School, in the year 1967. On 06.06.1970, he was promoted as Elementary School Headmaster in the same Panchayat Union. Thereafter, on 21.10.1980, he was transferred to Municipal Middle School at Aranthangi but, as a Secondary Grade Teacher. At that time, There was no difference in the pay scale pattern between the Secondary Grade Teachers working in Middle Schools and the Elementary School Headmasters. Later on, he was converted as Tamil Pandit with effect from 30.08.2001.
He was retired from Service on 31.10.2002, voluntarily. He died subsequently. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to the authorities to revise the pay scale of her husband Mr.K.Kannan, based on G.O.Ms.No.202, School Education Department, dated 24.09.2008. It was also accepted by the Education Department. But, the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Tamil Nadu, by his proceedings in Pension:32/7/FP/13204657 /10-11/ADK, dated 30.03.2011, rejected the revised proposal. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.
2.The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the claim of the petitioner. According to the 3rd respondent, to get the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.202, School Education Department, dated 24.09.2008, one should have been transferred from one Panchayat Union to another Panchayat Union before 01.06.1988 but, the petitioner's husband did not satisfy this condition, as his transfer was within the same Union.
3.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. I have also perused the records, carefully.
4.Before going into the factual aspects of the case, let us go to G.O.Ms.No.202, Education Department, dated 24.09.2008, As I have already pointed out, before the implementation of the V-Pay Commission Recommendations, the salary of the Elementary School Headmaster and the Secondary Grade Teachers working in Middle Schools were one and the same. In the V-Pay Commission, there arose some difference between these two categories. In order to strike a balance, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.202, Education Department, dated 24.09.2008, wherein the Government directed that those teachers, who were working as Elementary School Headmasters on or before 01.06.1988 and subsequently who were transferred as Secondary Grade Teachers, will be treated as Elementary School Headmasters in the matter of pay scale. According to the petitioner, the said direction issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.202 is squarely applicable to her husband. But, in the impugned order, the 3rd respondent has stated that since the petitioner's husband was not transferred from one Panchayat Union to another Panchayat Union and since he was transferred from the Panchayat Union School to Municipal School in the same Panchayat Union, he was not eligible for the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.202. In other words, according to the 3rd respondent, the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.202 can be given only if the individual had been transferred from one Panchayat Union to another Panchayat Union. Challenging this, the petitioner is before this Court.
5.I have considered the above submissions.
6.The issue, as I have already pointed out herein, is no more res integra. The question as to whether to get the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.202, Education Department, dated 24.09.2008, an Elementary School Headmaster should have been transferred as Secondary Grade Teacher from one Panchayat Union to another Panchayat Union, this Court has consistently held that it is not necessary. Even if an individual, who was working as Headmaster in Panchayat Union Elementary School is transferred to a middle school run by Municipality as a secondary grade teacher, even then he will be entitled for the benefit of the said Government Order. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in M.Annamalai v. Secretary to Government, School Education Department, reported in (2014) 5 MLJ 513 and yet another unreported judgment in W.P.Nos.8780 to 8747 of 2013, dated 30.04.2014, wherein, this Court has taken such view. This only supports the view that I have taken. I do not find any justification in the stand taken by the 3rd respondent to make a distinction between the Headmaster transferred from one Panchayat Union Elementary School to another Panchayat Union Middle School as Secondary Grade Teacher and a teacher who was working as an Elementary School Headmaster in a Panchayat Union School and later on transferred to a Middle School run by a Municipality in the same District. I find absolutely no basis for such a differentiation. If any such differentiation is allowed, it will only amount to clear discrimination, offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In such view of the matter, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
7.In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 30.03.2011, passed by the 3rd respondent is set aside. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider the proposal for revision of the pay sale and the pension of the petitioner's husband Mr.K.Kannan, by giving full effect to G.O.Ms.No.202, Education Department, dated 24.09.2008, to the case of the petitioner's husband Mr.K.Kannan and pay the revised pension and the arrears of salary and the pension. A consequential order, revising the pay scale and the pension and other monetary benefits shall be issued by the 3rd respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To
1.The Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Chennai.
2.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukottai.
3.The Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General, (Accounts & Entitlements), Chennai-18.