Madras High Court
Prof.Dr.G.Madurambal vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 14 October, 2022
Author: R.Suresh Kumar
Bench: R.Suresh Kumar
W.P.No.1549 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :14.10.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
W.P.No.1549 of 2017
and WMP.No.1447 of 2017
Prof.Dr.G.Madurambal
Daughter of S.Gurusamy
Residing at 8A, Sivan Chetty Street,
Vellippalayam,
Nagapattinam – 611 001.
Tamil Nadu ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. By the Secretary to Government,
Higher Education Department,
Fort St. George, Madras – 600 009.
2. The Directorate of Collegiate Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for Writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for records on the file of the
1st respondent dated 08.10.2015 letter No.18-846/F1-2015 and to quash
the same as illegal, incompetent, without jurisdiction and further direct
the respondents to step up the pay of the petitioner on par with the
juniors with effect from 01.01.1996.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 14
W.P.No.1549 of 2017
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari
For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash
Government Advocate
ORDER
The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the first respondent letter No.18-846/F1-2015 dated 08.10.2018 as illegal, incompetent, without jurisdiction and further direct the respondents to step up the pay of the petitioner on par with the juniors with effect from 01.01.1996.
2. The petitioner joined in service on 1981, on the date of joining, the petitioner had Masters degree, later she completed M.Phil and obtained doctorate(Ph.D) and she joined as an Assistant Professor on 19.08.1981 and later the post was re-designated as Lecturer, the petitioner held the post till 18.08.1989 and she was accorded lecturer on 19.08.1989 on completion of requisite years of service, the petitioner continued and entered into the selection grade and was the Head of the Department till 26.02.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 2 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 reader and Head of the Departments on 27.02.1998, she held the post till 01.01.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner was made as Dean of Science Department and Associate Professor and Head of the Department, in that post she continued till her retirement.
3. The petitioner secured a P.hd. degree on 27.02.1988, based on the additional qualifications, the additional incentive increment have to be paid to the petitioner. However, during the period of service of the petitioner, there has been three pay commissions i.e., 4th, 5th and 6th pay commission recommendation, the 4th pay commission should have been implemented from 01.01.1986, the 5th pay commission is from 01.01.1996 and the 6th pay commission is from 01.01.2006. In this context, because of these pay commission recommendations, where the pay has been streamlined and stepped up or enhanced, there has been certain pay anomalies among the juniors and the seniors, who are working in the same Department and in this regard, between 1980-1987 the seniors were given higher scale of pay whereas after 1987, the pay anomaly started and because of which, those who are juniors are getting higher pay after 1987 comparing with the seniors. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 3 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017
4. Therefore, in order to rectify these anomalies, based on the Government letter as well as the request of the petitioner, the case of the petitioner having been considered by the second respondent, he has passed an order on 07.02.2013 rectifying the pay anomaly. To appreciate the said order, in entirety of the said order dated 07.02.2013 passed by the second respondent is extracted hereunder:
@01/01/1996 Kjny muhriz vz;/111 I mky;gLj;jp 9.10.11 Mz;Lfspy;. TLjy; gzpf;fhyj;jpw;fhd kpif Cjpa cah;t[ld; (Bunching) Toa njh;t[ epiy (SG) eph;zak; bra;J. njh;t[ epiyapy; 5 Mz;Lfs; gzp Koj;j midtUf;Fk; U:/14940-? cah; Cjpak; tH';f Mizfs; tH';fg;gl ntz;Lk; vd fy;Y}hp Mrphpah; r';f';fs; nfhhpf;if tpLj;J. mf;nfhhpf;if ePz;l fhykhf epYitapy; ,Ue;J te;Js;sJ/ ,f;nfhhpf;if. fy;Y}hp fy;tp ,af;Feuhy; ftdKld; ghprPypf;fg;gl;lJ/ 01/01/1986 Kjy; gy;fiyf; fHf khd;af; FG jpUj;jpa Cjpa tpfpjj;ij bray;gLj;j tH';fg;gl;Ls;s murhiz(epiy) vz;/1785 fy;tp ehs;/ 05/12/1988?d;go vk;/gp/vy;-gp/vr;/o ,y;yhky; 8 tUl';fspy; KJepiya[k; KJepiyapy; 08 tUl';fs; Kof;Fk; epiyapy; njh;t[ epiya[k; Mrphpah;fSf;F tH';fpl Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ/ 01/01/1996 Kjy; gy;fiyf; fHf khd;af; FG jpUj;jpa Cjpa tpfpjj;ij bray;gLj;j tH';fg;gl;Ls;s murhiz (epiy) vz;/111 cah;fy;tp ehs; 24/03/1999?d;go vk;/gp/vy;-gp/vr;/o ,y;yhky; 6 tUl';fspy; KJepiya[k; KJepiyapy; 05 tUl';fs; Kof;Fk; epiya[k; njh;t[ epiya[k; Mrphpah;fSf;F tH';fpl Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ/ gzpapy; ,isath; gzpapy; K:j;jthpd; Cjpa epiyapid 11 Mz;Lfspy; mile;J mtiu tpl Tljyhf Cjpak; bgWfpd;wdh; vd;Wk; 1980?1987 tiuapyhd fhyf; fl;lj;jpy; gzpapy; nrh;e;j K:j;njhh; 1987f;F https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 gpd;dh; gzpapy; nrh;e;j ,isnahiu fhl;oYk; Fiwthd Cjpak; bgWk; epiy Vw;gl;Ls;sJ vd;Wk; nfhhpf;ifapy; bjhptpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/ ,k;Kuz;ghl;oid fisa[k; bghUl;L gpd;tUk; Mizfs; tH';fg;gLfpwJ/ 01/01/1996 Kjy; gy;fiyf; fHf khd;af; FG jpUj;jpa Cjpa tpfpjj;jpid bray;gLj;jp gzpnkk;ghL tH';Fk;nghJ. gzpnkk;ghL tH';Ftjw;fhd Fwpj;j njjp (crucial date) 27/07/1998 vd;gjw;F gjpyhf 01/01/1996 njjpf;F Kd; bfhz;L brd;W bray;gLj;j Miz tH';fyhfpwJ/ ,jd; K:yk; 01/01/1996 Kjy; 9.10.11 Mz;Lfspy; TLjy; gzpf;fhyj;jpw;fhd Cjpa cah;t[ld; (Bunching) Toa njh;te[ piy (selection grade) eph;zak; bra;J njh;t[ epiyapy; Ie;J Mz;Lfs; gzpepiwt[ bra;j midtUf;Fk; U:/14990-? cah; Jtf;f Cjpak; tH';f Miz tH';fg;gLfpwJ/ ,t;thW jpUj;jg;gl;l Cjpa eph;zaj;jpd; mog;gilapy; 01/01/2006 Kjy; tH';fg;gl;l (murhiz vz;/350 ehs;/09/09/2009) UGC Cjpa tpfpjj;ija[k; jpUj;jpaikf;f Mizfs; tH';fg;gLfpwJ/ ,r;bray;Kiwfis bgw;Wf; bfhz;likf;fhd bgwy; Vw;gpid jtwhJ mDg;gp itf;FkhW bjhptpf;fyhfpwJ/@
5. Though the said order has been passed on 07.02.2013, the Government i.e., first respondent seems to have given some directive to the Authorities concerned, including the second respondent and the Treasuries and Accounts Department to keep the said order passed by the second respondent dated 07.02.2013, to rectify the pay anomaly and to pay the difference of pay to the petitioner, in abeyance. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017
6. Subsequently, by order dated 08.10.2015, the first respondent has simply directed the Director of Treasuries and Accounts to issue necessary instructions to Pay Accounts Officer, Treasuries Officer not to pass any claim bills pertaining to the order of rectification of pay anomaly passed by the second respondent referred to above towards the petitioner.
7. Challenging the said order passed by the second respondent dated 08.10.2015 the present writ petition has been filed.
8. Heard Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who would submit that, as per the 4th, 5th and 6th pay commission recommendations, the pay has been stepped up to every employee including the petitioner, based on which, enhanced pay has to be paid including the arrears with effect from the date of implementation of recommendations of every such pay commission and in this regard, there has been a pay anomaly occurred in 1987 and thereafter, where juniors were getting higher pay and seniors were getting lower pay. Therefore, in order to rectify the same, the Government has issued a letter and based on the request made by the petitioner whose pay benefits having been considered and accordingly, the pay anomaly, under which https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 the petitioner was affected, having been taken note of by the second respondent and order of rectifying the pay anomaly was passed by the second respondent on 07.02.2013 and the order would speak for itself.
9. When that being so, such rectification order was directed to be kept in abeyance initially by the order of the first respondent and subsequently by the impugned order dated 08.02.2015 without assigning any reason whatsoever, the first respondent has straightaway issued a direction to the Director of Treasuries and Accounts not to pass any claim bills pertaining to the petitioner salary as per the pay anomaly order passed by the second respondent dated 07.02.2013.
10. Therefore, assailing the said order, the learned counsel would contend that absolutely no reason has been stated in the order impugned, therefore, for the said ground itself, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. He would further submit that, insofar as the pay anomaly is concerned, whenever it occurs after implementation of any pay commission recommendation that kind of pay anomaly would be rectified and in this regard one man commission would be appointed by the Government to issue guidelines as to how such kind of pay anomaly has https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 7 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 to be rectified.
11. Therefore, based on such guidelines given by the Government through Government letter dated 03.04.2012 and based on the connected records, the pay anomaly faced by the petitioner after 1987 having been considered was rectified by the order dated 07.02.2013 and therefore, the said order without even examining the same cannot be directed to be kept in abeyance initially and subsequently, a mere direction was given through the impugned order by the order of the first respondent not to pass any claim bills made by the petitioner based on the said order passed by the second respondent dated 07.02.2013. These kind of dictum cannot be given by the first respondent to the Pay and Accounts Officer, without having any plausible reason to interfere with the order passed by the second respondent to rectify the pay anomaly in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner canvass that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and as a sequel there shall be a direction to the first respondent to honour the order passed by the second respondent dated 07.02.2013 and to pay the arrears based on the pay anomaly rectification made through the said order till date.
12. I have heard Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Advocate https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 8 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 appearing for the respondents, who, on instructions would submit that the said order passed by the first respondent, which is impugned herein having been rectified subsequently orders have been passed.
13. Even though the said statement has been made by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, no such order has been produced, however, learned Government Pleader has produced a proceedings of the Director of College Education in May 2019, under which, to encash certain amount payable to the petitioner to the extent of Rs.2,60,481/-(Rupees Two lakhs sixty thousand four hundred and eighty one) as this was the difference of amount according to the respondents payable to the petitioner, after rectification of the pay anomaly that has been paid to the petitioner, that is the stand taken by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
14. However, the said stand taken by the respondents is disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who would submit that, based on the pay anomaly rectification order passed by the second respondent, if the current pay is fixed on the petitioner and based on which, if the arrears is calculated the difference of pay between what has https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 9 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 been paid already to the petitioner and what should have been paid to the petitioner is taken into account, the difference will be more and cumulatively the said amount will be definitely more than what has been now claimed to have been paid i.e., Rs.2,60,481/-(Rupees Two lakhs sixty thousand four hundred and eighty one)
15. I have considered the said rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the materials placed before this Court.
16. Insofar as the impugned order passed by the first respondent is concerned, it would not be worthy to implement because no reasons absolutely has been given by the first respondent as to why he has given the directions to the Director of Treasuries and Accounts to give instructions to the pay and accounts officer or treasuries officer not to pass any claim bills to the petitioner as per the rectification order dated 07.02.2013 of the second respondent.
17. In the order dated 07.02.2013, the second respondent has given https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 10 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 entire reason as to how the pay anomalies affected the petitioner and how it should be rectified based on the various Government Orders and after having addressed all these Government Orders and their import, the second respondent has passed a detailed order rectifying the pay anomaly and accordingly the pay of the petitioner has been fixed as per the UGC scale and accordingly, the pay anomaly since has been rectified to the petitioner, based on which, the pay fixed in this regard to the petitioner ought to have been paid to the petitioner till her entitlement and thereafter, after her retirement, based on which, the pension also should have been calculated and be paid to the petitioner.
18. However, without any reason since the same has been directed to be kept in abeyance initially and subsequently the direction was given by the first respondent through the impugned order not to honour the claim bills made by the petitioner is completely unjust, arbitrary and without assigning any reason, therefore, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the impugned order would not stand in the legal scrutiny. Hence, it is liable to be set aside.
19. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and now in view https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 11 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 of the stand taken by the respondents through the learned Government Counsel that the impugned order has been subsequently revised or modified however, no such order has been produced before this court and though it was the claim of the learned Government Counsel that the pay anomaly has been rectified and the arrears payable to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.2,60,481/-(Rupees Two lakhs sixty thousand four hundred and eighty one) has been paid in the year 2019, this Court feels that, apart from the said amount of Rs.2,60,481/-(Rupees Two lakhs sixty thousand four hundred and eighty one), the exercise that shall be undertaken by the respondents is to calculate the actual pay fixed as per the pay rectification order dated 07.02.2013 passed by the second respondent to the petitioner based on every pay commission recommendation till the superannuation of the petitioner and after calculating the cumulative amount to be payable to the petitioner, the amount already paid can be deducted and if any further amount as an arrear if it is liable to be paid that shall also be calculated and be paid to the petitioner.
20. That apart after the superannuation of the petitioner, correspondingly, the pension shall be calculated and the pension arrear if any i.e., difference of pension arrears between the enhanced pension and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 12 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 the original pension shall also be calculated and be paid to the petitioner.
21. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken by the respondents within a period of eight(8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
22. It is made clear that in this regard, if the petitioner wants to file any additional input to the second respondent as to how much amount so far she has received from the respondents that calculation memo also can be filed by her, based on which, the aforesaid excercise shall be undertaken by the respondents and order shall be passed.
With these directions, this writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
14.10.2022 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No mp R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 13 of 14 W.P.No.1549 of 2017 mp To
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By the Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Fort St. George, Madras – 600 009.
2. The Directorate of Collegiate Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
W.P.No.1549 of 2017
14.10.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 14 of 14