1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (CONTEMPT JURISDICTION) TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2010 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.110 OF 2009 ************ K.Palaniappan, 1.34,Main Road, Chittalandur – 637 201, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District. .. Petitioner Vs. Ravichandran, Accounts Officer (A & E) Office of the Accountant General, Tamil Nadu, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018. .. Respondent Contempt Petition praying that this Court be pleased to punish the respondent herein for the disobedience of the order tis Hon'ble Court dated 01.08/2008 and made in W.P.No.20091 of 2008. The above Contempt Petition coming on this day before this Court for hearing in the presence of Mr.D.Peter Francis, Advocate, for the petitioner herein; and of Mr.V.Vijayshankar, Advocate, for the respondent herein; and upon reading the petition and affidavit of K.Palaniappan, filed herein; the Court made the following order:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 This contempt petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court, on 1.8.2008, made in W.P.No.20091 of 2006. 2. This Court, by its order, dated 1.8.2008, made in W.P.No.20091 of 2006, had passed the following order: "Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has stated that he is a retired Headmaster. He had retired while he was serving as a Headmaster at Aringar Anna Municipal Middle School, Kuttapalli Colony, Tiruchengode, Salem District. Initially, the petitioner was appointed as a Higher Grade Teacher in the District Board, Salem, on 1.10.59. On 15.7.60, he was appointed as a Secondary Grade Elementary School Headmaster. On 1.6.84, he was appointed as a Middle School Secondary Grade Headmaster. He had obtained the qualification of Tamil Pandit, in the year 1967. He had passed his Bachelor of Arts Degree in Literature in the year 1979 and B.Ed., Degree in the year 1983. He had worked in various schools under the control of the third respondent. From 1.6.84, till his retirement, on 31.5.95, he had worked as the Headmaster of Arignar Anna Middle School, Kuttapalli Colony, Tiruchengode. Though his date of retirement was 31.1.95, it was extended till 31.5.95, as per the policy of the Tamilnadu Government. The petitioner had put in 35 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 years of service and he has obtained Selection Grade and Special Grade in the post of Secondary Grade Headmaster, on his completing 20 years of service. 3. It has been further stated that, pursuant to the constitution of the Fifth Pay Commission, the pay of the Headmasters of Middle Schools were fixed. A new entrant to the post of Headmaster would be fixed in the pay of scale of Rs.1640/-. A Selection Grade headmaster would be fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.2,000/- and a Special Grade Headmaster in the scale of pay of Rs.2200/-. The petitioner's pay was fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.2200/-, on 1.6.88, after the implementation of the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission report. Accordingly, his pay was fixed at Rs.2240/-, on 28.12.89, by the third respondent. The petitioner had further stated that on 20.10.92, the second respondent had fixed the pay of the petitioner at Rs.2425/- to Rs.2725/- and his last basic pay was fixed at Rs.2900/-, on 7.12.94, after granting him his annual increment. On attaining superannuation, on 31.1.95, the pension papers were sent to the first respondent for the sanctioning of pension and other pensionary benefits. The pension of the petitioner was fixed at Rs.1605/- and after commutation of pension, the pension was Rs.1070/- by paying him a sum of Rs.67154/-. The gratuity payable is Rs.57,420/-. The third respondent has to pay pension for 33 years and the second respondent is to pay the pension for two years. Based on the recommendations of the second respondent and the other recommendations and clarifications, the first respondent had fixed the pension of the petitioner at Rs.1605/- and on commuting a sum of Rs.535/-, it was Rs.1070/- and the commutation amount was Rs.67,154 and the Death-cum- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 Retirement Gratuity was Rs.57,420/-, by an order, dated 23.1.95. However, based on an anonymous petition, the first respondent had passed an order, on 28.2.95, directing the second respondent not to sanction the pension and the gratuity to the petitioner. Thereafter, after obtaining the necessary clarification, the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 19.10.95, fixing the pension of the petitioner at Rs.1444/- and after commuting Rs.481/-, the pension payable is Rs.963/- and the commuted value is Rs.60,376/- and the gratuity is Rs.51,480/-. Aggrieved by the order passed by the first respondent, the petitioner had filed an original application before the Tamilnadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.7684 of 1995, which has been transferred to this Court and re-numbered as W.P.No.20091 of 2006. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, it has been stated that the petitioner had retired from service as Headmaster, Panchayat Union Middle School, Koothapalli, Thiruchengode, on 31.1.95. On receipt of pension proposals, the service details of the petitioner were scrutinised and it was noticed by the first respondent that the Special Grade in Headmaster Middle School in the Scale of pay of Rs.905-1545 was granted to him, with effect from 1.10.84. Further, his pay was fixed, with effect from 1.6.88, in the corresponding scale of Rs.2200-4000, contrary to the relevant Government Orders issued by the Government. It has been further stated that the petitioner was promoted as a Headmaster Middle School, with effect from 1.10.84 only, but was awarded Special Grade in that post, with effect from 1.10.84 itself. The employee is entitled https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5 to Selection Grade on completion of 10 years of service in a post and for Special Grade on his completing another 10 years of service in Selection Grade or a total of twenty years in a post. Therefore, the irregular fixation of pay was communicated to the second respondent and the District Educational Officer, Sankari, had stated that Special Grade was wrongly awarded to the petitioner and that it would be rectified. As no further action was taken by the Department, the first respondent herein, in order to avoid hardship to the petitioner, had authorised pensionary benefits with reference to the pay of Rs.2600/-, pending further communication from the Department. 5. It has been further stated that the petitioner who was not a Middle School Headmaster, on 2.10.70, is not eligible to count his Elementary School Headmaster and Selection Grade Secondary Grade Teacher service for the purpose of Selection Grade/Special Grade in Headmaster Middle School cadre. As the petitioner was promoted as Headmaster only in the year 1984, the grant of Special Grade counting the lower post service is contrary to the Government orders and the instructions issued by the Government. The benefit allowed to those who were Headmasters of Middle School, as on 2.10.70, has been erroneously granted to the petitioner, who had never officiated, as such, before 1984. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to Special Grade in the post of Headmaster Middle School by virtue of his service as a Headmaster Elementary School for more than 20 years. By virtue of his service as Headmaster Elementary School, he is entitled to Special Grade in the Elementary School Head Master post, with effect from 1.6.88. Therefore, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6 his pay has been accordingly refixed on 1.6.88 at Rs.2120 in the scale of Special Grade Headmaster Elementary School i.e. 2000-3200. Regulating the pay as such, pensionary benefits were also authorised with reference to the correct pay of Rs.2600/- and no recovery of excess amount paid had been ordered by the first respondent as it has been erroneously fixed by the Department. 6. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had placed before this Court, an order of this Court, dated 27.6.2008, made in W.P.Nos.25067 and 26103 of 2006. Paragraph 4 of the order reads as follows: "4. In view of the stated position, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners for pensionary benefits by counting their service in the secondary grade category as well as the Primary School Headmaster category along with Middle School Headmaster post for the purpose of pensionary benefits. The respondents are directed to consider the same within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 7. Similarly, a Division Bench of this court, by its order, dated 28.2.2008, made in W.P.Nos.37855 and 37997 of 2003, had ordered as follows: "Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The present contesting respondents filed O.A.Nos.2927 and 2944 of 1998, claiming that they should be granted the scale available for special grade and the said original applications were allowed by the Tribunal. Subsequently, because of the non- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7 implementation of the order passed by the Tribunal, contempt application Nos.337 and 339 of 2002 were filed, wherein the following order was passed:- "The applicants have succeeded in getting an order from this Tribunal directing respondents to grant them all special grade. Learned Additional Standing Counsel undertakes that the order will be implemented within two weeks and arrears will all be paid within four weeks thereafter. In view of the submission made by the counsel for the respondents, both the Contempt Applications are ordered to be closed." 3. Instead of complying with such direction and in spite of undertaking given, the petitioners have filed the present writ petitions after lapse of about more than one year. It is also brought to our notice that many such similar matters have been implemented by the Government and many of the writ petitions have been dismissed. 4. Having regard to all these aspects, we do not find any scope to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and the writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the connected W.P.M.Ps. are also dismissed. No costs." 8. Relying on the above decisions, the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if this Court may be pleased to pass a similar order in the present writ petition. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has no objection for this Court passing such an order. 10. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the respondents are https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8 directed to consider the case of the petitioner, for the purpose of granting of pensionary benefits, by counting his service in the Secondary Grade category, as well as the Primary School Headmaster category, along with the service rendered in the post of Middle School Headmaster. The respondents are directed to consider the claims of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs." 3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, on 1.8.2008, the office of the Accountant General, (Accounts & Entitlements) Tamil Nadu, Chennai, had issued a letter, in Lr No.AG(A&E)/Legal Cell/WP 20091/2006/962, dated 6.10.2008, which is as follows: "The Madras High Court in order dated 1.8.2008, directed the Respondents to consider your claim and pass appropriate orders. Accordingly, the following order is passed in compliance with Hon'ble Court orders. Your claim is for special grade in Headmaster Middle School post with effect from 1.10.1984, placing reliance on, 1. G.O.784 RD&LA Dept, dated 14.6.79 2. G.O.1652 Education Department dated 26.10.87 3. Government Letter No.149 Education Department dated 2.2.89 4. Government Letter No.46880 Finance Department dated 20.11.90 5. Government Letter No.86313 Finance Department https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 9 dated 13.2.92 6. G.O.1178 Education Department dated 22.12.93 You have served as Headmaster Elementary School from 15.7.1960 to 31.5.1984. Therefore, you are entitled to Special Grade in Headmaster Elementary School post for having completed 20 years of service as Headmaster. Thus, you are entitled to pay of Rs.2120/- in 2000-3000 scale of pay with effect from 1.6.88 in the scale of Special Grade Headmaster Elementary School. Your last pay works to Rs.2600/- and pensionary benefits were authorised with reference to the Average Emolments as per Rules on 19.10.95 itself. II. The service rendered by you in Headmaster Middle School post i.e. from 1.6.84 to 31.1.95 for which you are eligible for Selection Grade in Headmaster Middle School post on 1.6.1994 in 8000-13500 scale (pre revised 2000-3200). But you are entitled to this scale even from 1.6.88 in the capacity of Special Grade. Headmaster Elementary School and you have received the pensionary benefits already in the scale. It is pertinent to state (1) to get special grade in Headmaster Middle School Post you should have served for 20 years in Headmaster Middle School post either prior to or after 1.10.70 or (2) you should have held the post of Headmaster Middle School as on 1.10.70 and got reverted to lower posts with pay protection (as per Para 6 of G.O.1178 Education dated 2.12.93). Your service as Headmaster, Middle School is 10 y 8 m and further on 1.10.70 your designation is Headmaster Elementary School not Headmaster Middle School. Therefore the benefits of this G.O. are not applicable to you. III Para 4(ii) a,b, d of G.O.784 RD & LA Department https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10 dated 14.5.79 deals with those who were Headmaster Middle School as on 1.10.70 and Para 4(ii)(c) speaks of the case of a Secondary Grade Teacher posted as Headmaster Middle School after 1.10.70 by virtue of seniority but reverted thereafter and again repromoted on 1.6.79. As you have been promoted on 1.6.84 as Headmaster Middle School and continued without reversion, these provisions are not relevant to your case. IV G.O.1652 Education Department dated 26.10.87 was issued granting Special Grade for Headmaster Middle School from 1.10.84. Only Selection Grade was provided before the date. By this G.O. Govt. granted Special Grades on completion of 20 years in Headmaster Post irrespective of the fact that they have completed 10 years in Selection Grade Headmaster Middle School post or not. Normally by serving 10 years in a post one is entitled to Selection Grade and by serving 10 years in Selection Grade Special Grade to be granted. By this G.O., 10 years in Selection Grade was not made as criterion but total service as Headmaster for 20 years is essential. Your service as Headmaster Middle School is only 10 years 8 months for which you are entitled to selection grade only and not special grade. V Letter No.149 Education dated 2.2.89 reiterates the point that Headmaster Middle School are also entitled for Special Grade from 1.10.84. This is applicable for those who have completed 20 years service as Headmaster Middle School as on 1.10.84. VI Govt. letter No.46880/PC/2/90-1 dated 20.11.90 had treated Secondary Grade Headmaster Middle School and B.T. Grade Headmaster Middle School alike from 1.6.88. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11 Since you have not served as Secondary Grade Headmaster Middle School this has no relevance to your case. VII Govt. letter No.86313 Finance Department dated 13.2.92 provides for counting the service of Secondary Grade Headmaster Middle School in B.T. Grade Headmaster Middle School post. You have served only as B.T. Grade Headmaster Middle School that too for 10 years 8 months only. It could be seen that you have placed reliance on the Gos and Government letters which are not in support of your claims. Further, on getting promotion as ordinary grade Headmaster Middle School on 1.6.84 seeking Special Grade in Headmaster Middle School post which requires 20 years service in that post has no basis. The pensionary benefits have already been authorised to you with reference to the entitled pay and therefore, while considering your claim it has been found to be not in accordance with Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978 and relevant Gos/Government letters. Hence you are not entitled to Special Grade Headmaster Middle School post/scale." 4.A counter affidavit, dated 16.4.2009, had been filed on behalf of the respondent denying the allegations made by the petitioner. It has also been stated that the order passed by this Court, on 1.8.2008, made in W.P.No.20091 of 2006, had been complied with and therefore, no contempt has been committed by the respondent, as alleged by the petitioner. The respondent had issued the proceedings, dated 6.10.2008, based on the relevant Government Orders https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 12 and the Government letters, which are applicable to the case in hand. Sufficient explanation has been given in the said proceedings, as to why the claims made by the petitioner are unsustainable in the eye of law. As such, the contempt petition is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. 5.The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that, in spite of a specific direction issued by this Court to consider the claims of the petitioner, in view of the order passed by this Court, in W.P.Nos.25067 and 26103 of 2006, dated 27.6.2008, and the order of a Division Bench of this Court, dated 28.2.2008, made in W.P.Nos.37855 and 37997 of 2003, the respondent had issued the proceedings, dated 6.10.2008, rejecting the claims of the petitioner, without adducing appropriate reasons for the same, quoting certain Government Orders and Government Letters, which are inapplicable to the case of the petitioner. For the legal notice issued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, a reply, dated 8.12.2008, had been issued rejecting the claims of the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is clear that the respondent had committed contempt of Court by his wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court, on 1.8.2008, made in W.P.No.20091 of 2006. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 13 6.In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the contempt petition and in view of the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, this Court is of the considered view that it cannot be held that the respondent had committed contempt of Court by wilfully disobeying the order passed by this Court, on 1.8.2008, made in W.P.No.20091 of 2006. 7.Various reasons had been given by the respondent in his proceedings, dated 6.10.2008, for rejecting the claims of the petitioner. It cannot be said that the respondent had wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court, dated 1.8.2008, made W.P.No.20091 of 2006. Hence, the contempt petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the impugned proceedings of the respondent, dated 6.10.2008, before the appropriate forum, in the manner known to law, if so advised. No costs. Witness the Hon'ble Thiru M.YUSUF EQBAL, The Chief Justice of High Court at Madras, as aforesaid, this the 20th day of July, 2010. SD/- DEPUTY REGISTRAR (OS) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2010. COURT OFFICER (O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the orders/judgments/Decrees in this format. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 14 Cns. CONTEMPT PETITION No.110/2009 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN ORDER DATED : 20/07/2010 FOR APPROVAL :18/08/2010 APPROVED ON :19/08/2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/