Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Dr.R.Kanemany vs / on 3 March, 2025

Author: C.V.Karthikeyan

Bench: C.V.Karthikeyan

                                  IIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED              :03.03.2025

                                                             CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

                                                W.P.No.1970 of 2024
                                                        and
                                            W.M.P.Nos.2088 & 2090 of 2024

                     Dr.R.Kanemany,
                     HOD/S&H,
                     Women's Polytechnic College,
                     (Upgraded as Women's Engineering College),
                     Lawspet, Puducherry.                                               .. Petitioner

                                                              /versus/

                     1.The Member Secretary,
                     Pondicherry Institute of Post-Matric
                     Technical Education (PIPMATE),
                     (Sponsored by the Government of Puducherry),
                     Lawspet, Puducherry 605 008.

                     2.The Principal,
                     Women's Engineering College,
                     (A Government of Puducherry Institution)
                     Lawspet, Puducherry 605 008.                                       .. Respondents
                     Prayer:         Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
                     Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the
                     records of the 1st respondent in Memorandum No.1/1/2/PIPMATE/

                     1/9


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis               ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm )
                     2010/A1/Vol.I/621dated 20.11.2023 requiring the 2nd respondent to recover
                     the excess payment made on account of grant of three non-compounded
                     advance increments and the consequent office order of the 2nd respondent in
                     No.6/1/1/WEC/Estt./2023 /A/24 dated 23.01.2024 directing the petitioner to
                     pay the excess recovery amount of Rs.26,29,057/- and to quash the same.

                                  For Petitioner   :M/s Bhargavi Gopalan
                                  For Respondents :Mr.R.Syed Mustafa
                                                    Spl.G.P.(Pondy)
                                                             ------
                                                           ORDER

This writ petition has been filed in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari seeking interference with the Memorandum dated 20.11.2023 issued by the first respondent directing the second respondent to recover what had been termed as “excess payment” made on account of grant of three non- compounded advance increments and consequently, also interefere with the order of the second respondent dated 23.01.2024 directing the petitioner to pay “excess” recovery amount of Rs.26,29,057/-. The petitioner seeks that both the aforementioned communications must be quashed by this Court.

2. When the writ petition came up for admission, it had been admitted 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) on 29.01.2024 by the learned Single Judge of this Court and stay of recovery alone had been granted. The writ petitioner had been initially appointed as a Lecturer in Karaikal Polytechnic College, Karaikal, within the Union Territory of Pondicherry on 23.11.1994. She completed her M.Phil degree in Chemistry and subsequently, completed her Ph.D. degree in Chemistry in the year 2009. In accordance with the service conditions, which the respondents are bound to offer to the petitioner, she was entitled for incentive increment on completion of M.Phil degree. Subsequently, on completion of Ph.D., she was entitled for three incentive increments. The petitioner was granted only two additional increments on 11.09.2009. This grant of increments was in accordance with the AICTE guidelines published in the Gazettee Notification of AICTE on 04.012016. This was also in accordance with the recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission. A Notification was issued on 04.01.2016 by the AICTE for Technical Education, wherein after taking into consideration various representations made relating to clarifications arising out of the implementation of AICTE Regulations issued in the year 2010, it had been stated that the advance 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) increments for those, who acquired Ph.D./M.Phil/M.Tech/and other equivalent qualifications, while in service could not be allowed to the employees falling in the payband PB-4 (Rs.37400-67000). The petitioner fell within that particular payband. Therefore, by this particular notification which had been issued on 04.01.2016, though earlier the petitioner had been granted incentive for completing M.Phil and Ph.D., the petitioner was considered not entitled for the said grant.

3. In the impugned order, which is dated 20.11.2023 issued by the first respondent and a copy marked to the second respondent, after drawing reference to the above mentioned notification dated 04.01.2016, the three non-compounded advance increments was held cannot be granted to the petitioner and therefore, since it has been clarified that it should be withdrawn, the second respondent was directed to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner and deposit the same in the Government account.

4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm )

4. Consequent to this particular communication made by the first respondent, the second respondent, vide further communication dated 23.01.2024 issued to the petitioner, which is also impugned in this writ petition, has forwarded the same stipulating the manner in which the said recovery should be made. This recovery had been stayed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, when the writ petition came up for admission.

5. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order stood fall only because it had not taken into consideration the fact that a subsequent clarification has been issued by the AICTE on 29.05.2020. This particular clarification has been issued owing to representations received, while implementing the AICTE regulations dated 05.03.2010 and the subsequent notification dated 04.01.2016. In the notification dated 04.01.2016, the grant of three non-compounded increment had been withdrawn for those in the pay band applicable to the petitioner. In the clarification issued on 29.05.2020, the AICTE had very specifically stated that this particular clarification which has been issued on 04.01.2016 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) withdrawing the grant of non-compounded increments for qualification in M.Phil, Ph.D., would be applicable only for those who had acquired Ph.D qualification, after the date of publication of AICTE clarification dated 04.01.2016. This would make it very evident that those who had acquired M.Phil and Ph.D., qualification prior to the 04.01.2016 whould be entitled for grant of non compounded increment and it whould also imply that those, who had been so granted such increment, were to continue to enjoy such benefit and such benefit should not be withdrawn. This particular clarification and notification dated 20.05.2020 had been completely overlooked by the first respondent, while issuing the impugned order.

6. According to the petitioner, she had completed both M.Phil and Ph.d., much earlier and prior to 04.01.2016 and as a matter of fact, in the year 2007-2009. The impugned orders have not referred to the notification dated 20.05.2020. In that particular notification, it has been clearly stated that the withdrawal of grant of increments would be applicable only to those who had acquired Ph.D. after 04.01.2016. For those who had obtained 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) M.Phil and Ph.D. before that date, the increments already been granted cannot be withdrawn. The petitioner falls under that particular category. The impugned orders suffer and set aside.

7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. An interim order of stay had been granted. Any increments withdrawn subsequent to the issuance of the impugned order downgrading of the scale of pay of the petitioner should be revisited and the petitioner must be granted the benefit of such increments and revision of pay scale. The entire exercise must be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

03.03.2025 Index:yes/no ari 7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) To:

1.The Member Secretary, Pondicherry Institute of Post-Matric Technical Education (PIPMATE), (Sponsored by the Government of Puducherry), Lawspet, Puducherry 605 008.
2.The Principal, Women's Engineering College, (A Government of Puducherry Institution) Lawspet, Puducherry 605 008.
8/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm ) C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

ari W.P.No.1970 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.2088 & 2090 of 2024 03.03.2025 9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/03/2025 02:05:13 pm )