Madras High Court
WP(MD)/23870/2019 of A.Arockiasamy Vs The State of Tamilnadu on 14 October 2026
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.DILIP KUMAR
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019
CNR:{HCMD011065632019}
A.Arockiasamy
Sengudi Village and Post, R.S.Mangalam,
Ramanathapuram District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu
Rep. by its Secretary, School Education
Department., Secretariat, Chennai
2. The Director of School Education,
Chennai-6
3. The Chief Educational Officer
Ramanathapuram District
4. The District Educational Officer
Ramanathapuram District
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 4th respondent in his proceedings in O.Mu.No.3536/A3/2019 dated 16.09.2019 and quash the same and direct the respondents to step up the scale of pay of the petitioner as per Rule 4(3) of the Tamil Nadu Revised Scale of pay Rules 1989 and confer all the consequential monetary benefits to the petitioner.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s. V.Panneer Selvam
__________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019
For Respondent(s):
Mr. S. Vashik Ali
Additional Government Pleader
for R1 to R4
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Today, when the matter is taken up the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. V. Panneer Selvam circulated a judgment of this Court in WP(MD)No.15075 of 2017 in the case of A.Jeyakumar Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, decided on 16.03.2023 and would say that the facts in the present case are similar to the above case and a similar order may be passed.
2. The operative portion of the said order is extracted here under:- “7. But this Court is not able to accept another contention of the petitioner. This Court entertains a doubt, whether a person who has been promoted to Middle School Headmaster is entitled to consider as if the he is deemed to be in Primary School Headmaster for 10 years and fix selection grade, thereafter, fixing the ordinary grade scale of pay in the promoted post. The petitioner is claiming that he should be considered as deemed to be in Primary School HM for 10 years even though he has been promoted to Middle School HM before completing the 10 years of Primary School HM.
8. Since both the issues have serious repercussions __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 and has state wide impact and moreover the issue is recurring problem in Education Department, especially in the Elementary Education, this Court is of the considered opinion that the “Director of Elementary Education” ought to consider the issues and pass clarification orders.
9. Therefore, impugned order, dated 28.07.2017 is hereby set aside and this Court directing the 2nd respondent to consider the aforesaid two issues and pass orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.”
3. The facts of the present case is that the writ petitioner was appointed as a Secondary grade Teacher on 16th September 1987. Later, he was promoted as a Tamil Pandit on 4th June 1993 and thereafter to the post of Middle School Head Master on 30th June 1995 and was later transferred to the equivalent post of Assistant Elementary Educational Officer on 1st March 1999 and further promoted to the post of High School Head Master on 16th December 2013.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, if he had continued as a Middle School Head Master, he would have been given a special grade pay as on 30th June 2015, upon the completion of 20 years of service and because of his promotion, he could not avail the benefit and this is __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 protected under Rule 4 (3) of the Tamil Nadu revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1989. Since the pay fixed in the post is lower than the pay fixed in the substantial post and he accordingly prays for appropriate orders.
4. Per contra, Mr. S. Vashik Ali, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent would submit that the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.14035 of 2019 dated 15th November 2022. The relevant portion is extracted here under:- “10. At this juncture, the learned Special Government Pleader made a submission that, even at the time of initial revision of pay, the petitioner had given an undertaking that in the event of any error in fixation, she has no objection for recovering the excess pay, if any paid. Based on the undertaking, the correctness was verified and thereafter, the pay was revised. Thus, there is no infirmity.
11. This Court is of the considered opinion that the undertaking given by the petitioner is binding on her. In the event of any error or otherwise is identified at a later point of time, there is no impediment for the authorities competent to recover the excess salary. Unjust gain in the matter of salary by the public servants is impermissible. Therefore, there is no impediment for the competent __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 authorities to correct the errors, if any occurred in fixing the scale of pay. In this regard, the employee also has given an undertaking and thus, this Court do not find any infirmity in respect of the order passed. The speaking order passed by the competent authorities, re~fixing the scale of pay with reasonings, need not be interfered with by this Court.”
5. He would also inform this Court that the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1989 is not applicable and it has been substituted with subsequent revised scale of pay rules issued for the corresponding years for the subsequent years.
6. In this regard, he relies upon the proceedings of the Director of School Education vide Rc.No.102501/L3/99, dated 31st March 2000 and would submit that after the introduction of the Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1998, the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1989 will not be applicable after 01.01.1996.
7. In the light of the above facts, considering that the impugned order is passed without taking all the above legal propositions canvassed on the side of the writ petitioner, the following order is passed.
(a) The impugned order is set aside. The writ petitioner is given liberty to make a fresh representation attaching all the relevant documents on which he wants to place reliance upon and submit the same to the 4th __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 respondent within a period of four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(b) Upon receiving such representation, the 4th respondent is directed to prepare a proposal and forward the same through the higher authorities to the 1st respondent.
(c) The 1st respondent will thereafter take a call on the matter and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a cumulative period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No psm __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 To
1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by its Secretary, School Education Dept., Secretariat, Chennai
2. The Director of School Education Chennai-6
3. The Chief Educational Officer Ramanathapuram District
4. The District Educational Officer Ramanathapuram District __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 N.DILIP KUMAR, J. psm WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 14-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )
WP(MD) No. 23870 of 2019 __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 03:39:57 pm )