IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 6.11.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. MANIKUMAR W.P.No.29872 of 2006 (O.A.No.7177 of 1996) K.P.Ganapathy ... Petitioner Versus 1. The Chief Educational Officer, Dharmapuri District. 2. The Headmaster, Government High School, Berikai Post, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. ... Respondents This petition came to be numbered by transfer of O.A.No.7177 of 1996 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, praying for mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to have the date of annual increment as 1st April instead of 1st October and accord the consequential benefits of one increment with effect from 1.4.1988. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mani For Respondents : Mrs.C.K.Vishnupriya Addl. Government Pleader ***** O R D E R The petitioner has sought for a Mandamus directing the respondents to fix the date of annual increment, as 1st April of every year instead of 1st October and accord the consequential benefit of one increment with effect from 1.4.1988. 2. Brief facts leading to the Writ Petition are as follows: The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher (Higher Grade) on 14.04.1960. Thereafter, he was awarded Selection Grade from 01.01.1971 and Special Grade from 01.01.1981 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respectively. However, monetary benefit was given only from 01.09.1980, in the cadre of Selection Grade Physical Education Teacher. Though, the petitioner was paid annual increments periodically on the 1st April every year, without giving an opportunity to the petitioner, the Headmaster of the second respondent School, changed the quarter of annual increment of the petitioner, from April to October, referring to the audit objection. In regard, no order was communicated to the petitioner. But the Headmaster of the second respondent School has suo moto effected the change in the Service Register. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has made a representation to the authorities on 3.4.1996. The petitioner had attained the age of superannuation on 13.9.1996. As the respondents have failed to respond, the petitioner has preferred the Original Application, which has been subsequently transferred and re-numbered as the present Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 4. At the time of filing of the Original Application, the petitioner was on extension service. Perusal of the material available on record, reveals that revision of the quarter of annual increment from April to October was made in the year 1989 by the Headmaster of the Government High School, pursuant to an audit objection. Admittedly, petitioner was paid annual increment periodically till April 1988. If the rights of the petitioner had been infringed by the revision of the quarter of annual increment, 1989, he should have challenged the same before the competent authority or the Court of law, at the appropriate time. The petitioner has filed the O.A.No.7177 of 1996 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal only on 24.11.1996, ie., after a lapse of more than six years and that too at the fag end of the extended period of service. No reasons have been assigned for the inordinate delay. 5. In view of the above, I do not find that the petitioner has made out a case for issuing the direction, as prayed for in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ vaan To 1. The Chief Educational Officer, Dharmapuri District. 2. The Headmaster, Government High School, Berikai Post, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. SGL (CO) km/18.11. W.P.No.29872 of 2006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/