IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:18.04.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.3210 of 2007 G.Jayaraman .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Director of School Education College Road, Nungambakkam Chennai 600 006. 2.The District Chief Educational Officer Cuddalore District Cuddalore 607 001. 3.The Headmaster Government Boys Higher Secondary School Kattumannarkoil Cuddalore District. 4.Office of the Accountant General (A&E) Tamil Nadu, Chennai. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the proceedings by the Second Respondent in his proceedings No.O.Mu.No.9196/A5/2006 dated 02.07.2006 and as the subsequential relief direct the respondents to grant the petitioner the stagnation increment from 01.06.1991 and revise his pension. For petitioner : Mr.V.T.Balaji For respondents : Mr.S.Naganathan for R.1 to R.3 Mr.T.Ravikumar for R.4 ORDER The writ petition is directed against the order of the second respondent dated 02.07.2006, by which the claim of the petitioner for stagnation increment came to be rejected and also for direction to grant stagnation increment to the petitioner from 01.06.1991 and to revise his pension. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The petitioner had worked as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Kattumannarkoil and retired on 28.02.1994. He had obtained Special Grade in the Secondary Grade on 01.06.1981 and completed 10 years in his Special Grade on 31.05.1991. As per G.O.Ms.No.241 Finance (Oo.Ku.) Department dated 01.04.1981, he is eligible to get one stagnation increment from 01.06.1991 in addition to his basic pay in the scale of pay, Rs.1640- 60-2600-75-2900 until the date of retirement, viz., 28.02.1994. Accordingly, the pension amount has to be revised. a) The petitioner has made a representation to the third respondent, the Headmaster of the School, on 23.05.2005, to revise his pension by adding the stagnation increment from 01.06.1991 to 28.02.1994 and reminders were sent to the third respondent on 10.07.2005 and on 07.09.2005. b) Thereafter, by referring to G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance (Oo.Ku.) Department dated 28.09.1998, the second respondent, by impugned order dated 02.07.2006, rejected the representation of petitioner to revise his pension on the ground that he is not eligible for stagnation increment, as he had completed 10 years after Special Grade. According to the petitioner, his eligibility is as per G.O.Ms.No.241 Finance (Oo.Ku.) Department dated 01.04.1981 and it is also clearly mentioned in the clarification letter of the Finance Secretary dated 23.07.1999 and 01.03.2000, that if the Secondary Teacher who has completed 10 years without any promotion is eligible to get one stagnation increment and that is also available under Rule 26-A and Sub-rule 15 of the Fundamental Rules. c) Nowhere it is stated that in respect of Secondary Grade Teachers, they are eligible if they have completed 10 years after reaching their maximum time scale of pay as wrongly stated by the second respondent in the impugned proceedings. It is also stated that one N.Chinnayan, retired Teacher, Government Higher Secondary School, Meensurutti, Perambalur District and K.Purushothaman, retired Teacher, Government Higher Secondary School, Neduncheri, Cuddalore District and D.Sambandam, retired Teacher, Government Higher Secondary School, Meensurutti, Perambalur District, who are retired and similarly situated persons as that of the petitioner were given the revised pension in the year 2004, but the respondents are discriminating the petitioner. d) It is also stated that some other Teachers, viz., B.Ramalingam, M.Kanagasabai, S.Jayaraman, who retired from Government Higher Secondary School, Lalpettai, Cuddalore District and P.Pattuchamy, who retired from High Secondary School, T.Neduncheri, Cuddalore District, R.Venkatesan, Government High School, Periyakuppam, have also been given the revised pension. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order of the second respondent. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, it is stated that the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 26.07.1957 and the Selection Grade was awarded to him on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 01.04.1974 and Special Grade on 01.06.1981 and he retired from service on 28.02.1994. According to the second respondent, it is not correct to state that as per G.O.Ms.No.241 Finance (PC) Department dated 01.04.1981, he is eligible to get one stagnation increment from 01.06.1991. The petitioner has failed to note that in G.O.Ms.No.666 Finance (PC) Department dated 27.06.1989, the facility of granting stagnation increment was withdrawn with effect from 27.06.1989. a) It is stated that the petitioner has not reached the maximum time scale of pay but he has received the time scale of Rs.1640-60-2600-75-2900 on the date of retirement, viz., on 28.02.1994. He has completed 10 years of service in the Special Grade only on 01.06.1991, that is after 27.06.1989 and therefore, the petitioner is not eligible to get one stagnation increment. It is also not correct to state that he is eligible for one increment as per the Government letters dated 27.03.1999 and 01.03.2000. The above letters are to be read along with G.O.Ms.No.666 dated 27.06.1989. b) It is stated that on representation from the employees in the Selection Grade and Special Grade, the same was reintroduced as per G.O.Ms.No.304 Finance dated 28.03.1990 and one bonus increment for those who have completed 10 years of service in the Special Grade was sanctioned with effect from 01.09.1998 in G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance (PC) Department dated 28.09.1998 and therefore, there is no provision to grant one stagnation increment for those employees who have completed 10 years of service in the Special Grade from 26.07.1989 to 31.08.1998. 4. On the facts of the present case, it is the stand of the second respondent that the petitioner was given Special Grade on 01.06.1981 and completed 10 years in that Grade on 01.06.1991 and at the time of his retirement, viz., on 28.02.1994, he has not reached the maximum pay and therefore, not eligible for stagnation increment. In G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance (PC) Department dated 28.09.1998, based on the One Man Commission recommendations, the Government has directed that the employees stagnating in a post beyond 30 years, viz., employees stagnating in the Special Grade beyond 10 years shall be granted with one bonus increment as an incentive. The following is the operative portion, " Stagnation increments (two increments including the normal increment) has completed in paragraph 6 III (a) of G.O.Ms.No.1050 Finance (PC) Department dated 05.10.1978 may be sanctioned to the employees completing 10 years service in the Selection Grade. Stagnation increment beyond the maximum of the scale at the rate of last increment may be given annually for the personnel the maximum of whose scale of pay does not exceed Rs.2000/- per mensem." 5. On the facts of the present case, it is admitted that the petitioner has completed 10 years of service after the conferment of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Special Grade, but still by referring to G.O.Ms.No.562 dated 28.09.1998, the second respondent has passed the impugned order that inasmuch as the petitioner has retired on 28.02.1994, he is not eligible for the stagnation increment. However, that is not stated in G.O.Ms.No.562 dated 28.09.1998. Under G.O.Ms.No.241 Finance (PC) Department dated 01.04.1981, the Government has granted the stagnation increment, which is as follows: (i) The scheme of stagnation increments allowed in Paragraph 6 III of G.O.Ms.No.1050 Finance (PC) Department, dated 05.10.1978 shall be applicable to the employees stagnating in the Selection Grade/Special Grade also; (ii)Employees stagnating in the selection Grade/Special Grade scale beyond ten years shall also be given two increments (including the normal increment) on his completion of ten year service in the Selection Grade/Special Grade post. This benefit will be available only once in the same cadre with cumulative effect. The usual annual increment will be sanctioned from the subsequent year onwards; (iii)Stagnation increments beyond the maximum of the scale at the rate of their last increment shall also be given annually for the personnel, the maximum of whose scale of pay does not exceed Rs.2000/- per mensem and (iv)The orders issued in paragraph 6 III of G.O.Ms.No.1050 Finance (PC) Department dated 05.10.1978 shall stand modified to this effect." and that has been given effect from the date of issuance of the Government Order dated 04.04.1981. That G.O.Ms.No.241 dated 01.04.1981 continues to be in operation even after G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance Department dated 28.09.1998 and that has been clarified by the Government of Tamil Nadu in the letter No.57086/PC/99-1 Finance (PC) Department dated 23.07.1999, which is as follows: " 4. I am directed to clarify that the orders issued in the Government Order first cited shall be in operation even after the issue of orders based on the recommendations of One Man Commission in the Government Order second cited. Further, the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.562 Finance (PC) Department dated 28.09.1998 shall apply to those employees who have been awarded special Grade scales of pay only with effect from 27.06.1989 based on the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.304 Finance (PC) Department dated 28.03.1990." 6. Therefore, by virtue of the clarification issued by the Government on 23.07.1999, inasmuch as G.O.Ms.No.241 Finance dated 01.04.1981 continues to be operative, by which the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of stagnation increment, the mere statement made in G.O.Ms.No.562 dated 28.09.1998 to the effect that the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Government Order shall take effect from 01.09.1998, cannot deprive the petitioner to have the right conferred under G.O.Ms.No.241 dated 01.04.1981. The Government having clarified its own stand in the letter dated 23.07.1999, cannot now go back by relying upon G.O.Ms.No.562 dated 28.09.1998 for the purpose of denying the stagnation increment due to the petitioner, which has been conferred under G.O.Ms.No.241 dated 01.04.1981. By G.O.Ms.No.666 dated 27.06.1989, persons who have already obtained after 01.06.1988 or entitled to obtain stagnation increment prior to issue of the said order on account of non-availability of selection or Special Grade, after completion of 10 years are also given protection based on the Central Government Scheme. It is relevant to extract G.O.Ms.No.666 dated 27.06.1989, which is as follows: "II. The Pay Commission has recommended changes in the existing system of stagnation increments consequent on the grant of Central Government scales of pay to the State Government employees. The Government of India has been adopting a system wherein stagnation increments are allowed to their employees once in two years subject to a maximum of three stagnation increments for those reaching the maximum in the scales of pay. The Pay Commission has recommended adoption of the above system for the State Government Employees also. The Government have accepted this recommendations and direct that in lieu of the existing system of granting stagnation increments every year to Government Servants on reaching the maximum of their scale of pay. The stagnation increment be sanctioned once in two years to all employees after reaching the maximum of their time scales subject to a maximum under of three stagnation increments. Consequent on the above decision the Government also direct that the system of granting stagnation increment to employees on completion of 10 years of service in the Ordinary Grade where Selection Grade has not been provided or in the Selection grade posts where Special grade has not been provided in the existing scales of pay be dispensed with. However, persons who have already obtained after 1st June 1988 or entitled to obtain this stagnation increment prior to issue of these orders on account of non- availability of Selection/Special Grade for their respective posts after completing 10 years of service shall be given protection by granting the above stagnation increment in the revised scales after fixing their pay in the revised scales according to the rules." 7. In such view of the matter, the reason given by the second respondent in the impugned order for denying the stagnation increment is improper and invalid and accordingly, the impugned order stands set aside with direction to the second respondent to pass appropriate orders granting the said increment to the petitioner and consequently https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ revise the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner by passing appropriate orders, which shall be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar Kh To 1.The Director of School Education College Road, Nungambakkam Chennai 600 006. 2.The District Chief Educational Officer Cuddalore District Cuddalore 607 001. 3.The Headmaster Government Boys Higher Secondary School Kattumannarkoil Cuddalore District. 4.Office of the Accountant General (A&E) Tamil Nadu, Chennai. 2 cc To Mr.V.T.Balaji, Advocate, SR.26680. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.26971. W.P.No.3210 of 2007 KSK(CO) RVL 27.04.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/