Madrasdated High Court · 2025

W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents in relation to the proceedings issued in letter (Ms) No.129 School Education [PK5(2)] 2013-1 dated 17.07.2013 and Na.Ka.No.1782/A1/2023 dated 03.01.2025 issued by the first and fourth respondents respectively and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and to drop all further proceedings and to continue the grant of incentive increment for M.Phil qualification to the petitioner as per the proceedings issued in Moo.Mu.No.210/A2 dated 26.03.2013 of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, K.Paramathy Panchayat Union, Karur District.W.P.Nos.16372 of 2025M.Karupan... PetitionerVs.1. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.2. The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.3. The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Karur District.2/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 20254. The Block Educational Officer, Thanthoni Panchayat Union, Thanthoni, Karur District.... RespondentsPrayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents in relation to the proceedings issued in letter (Ms) No.129 School Education [PK5(2)] 2013-1 dated 17.07.2013 and Na.Ka.No.25/A2/2024 dated 02.04.2024 issued by the first and fourth respondents respectively and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and to drop all further proceedings and to continue the grant of incentive increment for M.Phil qualification to the petitioner as per the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.240/A3/2013 dated 15.04.2013 of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Thanthoni Panchayat Union, Karur District.For Petitioner: Mr.R.Saseetharanin both W.PsFor Respondents: Mrs.Mythreye Chandru,in both W.Ps Special Government Pleader *****C O M M O N O R D E RThese Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 17.07.2013, 03.01.2025 and 02.04.2024 passed by the first and fourth respondents respectively.3/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 20252. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that they are working as B.T. Assistants in Paramathi Panchayat Union School, Karur, and Thanthoni Panchayat Union School, Karur. They were granted the first set of incentive increments for M.A. and M.Sc. degrees from April 2008 and 01.06.2006 respectively. Thereafter, the petitioners acquired M.Phil degree and were granted a second set of increments with effect from the date of their qualification, i.e., 27.07. 2010, and 01.10.2007, being the day following the last date of their examination for the M.Phil degree, as per G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the said G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, is an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.1024, Education, Science & Technology Department, dated 19.12.1993. However, contrary to the above position, by referring to the letter dated 17.07.2013, vide reference in Letter (Ms) No.129, School Education [PK5(2)] 2013-1, the respondent authority has held that the petitioners are entitled to an increment only from the date of the said Government Order, viz., 18.01.2013, and ordered the impugned recovery dated 03.01.2025, and 02.04.2024, respectively.4/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 20252.1. He would further submit that the authority has no right to withdraw the right conferred under the said Government Order by way of clarification and that the impugned orders dated 03.01.2025, and 02.04.2024, did not take into consideration of the above aspect. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgements of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of S.Suriaprakasam and others vs. Government of Tamil Nadu and others (W.P. No. 2912 of 2016, dated 09.01.2023) and in the case of A. Annakumar and others vs. Government of Tamil Nadu (W.P. No. 9027 of 2015, dated 24.10.2024). Hence, he prayed to interfere with the impugned orders.3. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would contend that the incentive for M.Phil and Ph.D qualifications was introduced vide G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013. Therefore, any incentive increment should only be prospective. Consequently, she justified the impugned recovery and the clarification letter issued by the fourth and first respondents, respectively. In support of her contentions, the learned Special Government Pleader relied 5/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in N.S.Balasubramaniam Vs. Director of School Education (Service Division) (W.P. No.37180 of 2024 dated 30.01.2025). She would further submit that any parity claimed by the petitioners based on the order of the learned Single Judge is nothing but negative equality, which cannot be granted. Hence, prayed to dismiss these Writ Petitions. 4. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.5. The short point involved in these Writ Petitions is, whether the right conferred under G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, for incentive increments for acquiring M.Phil degree would be effective from the date of the said Government Order, i.e., 18.01.2013, or from the date following the last date of examination for the degree. In this regard, it is appropriate to refer to Rule 26 of the Fundamental Rules of the Government of Tamil Nadu, which reads as follows:-“(2) In cases where the passing of an examination or test confers on a Government servant the title to any right, benefit or concession, such title should be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination 6/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025or test which he passed. In cases where the examination or test can be passed in installments, the title to the right, benefit or concession will be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination in the subject or subjects in which he has passed.”According to Rule 26 of the Fundamental Rules of the Tamil Nadu Government, whenever any title, benefit, or concession is granted based on a degree, such concession or title would accrue on the day following the last day of examination or test that the individual has passed.6. Now, the issue is that according to G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, the government granted incentives to B.T. Assistants those who have secured either M.Phil or Ph.D. The said Government Order came into effect from 18.01.2013. For ready reference, the said G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, is extracted hereunder:-“” gs;spf; fy;tp ,af;Feupd; gupe;Jiu murhy; ftdKld;“ Ma;t[ bra;ag;gl;L mjid Vw;W. gl;ljhup Mrphpau;fs; cau; fy;tp jFjpahd vk;/V/. vk;/v!/rp/. f;F bgWk; Kjy; Cf;f Cjpa cau;it jtpu. nkYk; ,uz;lhtJ Cf;f Cjpa cau;it bgw murhiz vz;/1024. fy;tp. mwptpay; kw;Wk; bjhHpy; El;gj; Jiw. ehs; 09/12/1993?d; go mDkjpf;fg;gl;l jfjpahd cau;fy;tp vk;/vl;/. vd;gjw;F gjpyhf vk;/vl;/. 7/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025my;yJ vk;/gpy;/. my;yJ gp/vr;/o/. gl;lk; bgw;wpUe;jhy; ,uz;lhtJ Cf;f Cjpa cau;t[ cau;t[f;fhd cau;fy;tpj; jFjpahf fUjp. mjhtJ xU Mrphpahpd; bkhj;jg; gzpf; fhyj;jpy; mjpfg; gl;rkhf ,U Cf;f Cjpa cau;t[fns mDkjpf;fntz;Lk; vd;fpd;w epge;jidfSf;Fl;gl;L ,uz;lhtJ Cjpa cau;t[ mspf;fyhk; vd Kot[ vLj;J mt;thnw muR Miz btspapLfpwJ/”7. But subsequent to the above Government Order, vide the impugned letter dated 17.07.2013, the Government has clarified that the benefit under G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, would be given prospectively with effect from 18.01.2013. It is pertinent to note that the said G.O.(1D) No.18 came into effect only after a situation where an M.Ed., degree was not provided under distance mode; therefore, the teachers were affected from getting incentives. To alleviate their grievance, an incentive was permitted for those who completed M.Phil or Ph.D degree. According to the petitioner, G.O.(1D) No.18, Education Department, dated 18.01.2013, is in a way an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.1024, Education, Science & Technology Department, dated 19.12.1993.8. This Court had decided a similar issue in A. Annakumar's case cited supra, and analyzed the issue in depth, ultimately held in paragraphs 13, 8/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 202514, 15, and 17, which read as follows:-“13. Before proceeding further, it may be relevant to refer to paragraph 5 of the counter filed by the third respondent, wherein, the reason behind extending the benefit of incentive increment not only to the teachers, who have acquired M.Ed., degree, but also to those who had acquired M.Phil., or Ph.D., degree, has been explained. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder: “5. I submit that a B.T. Teacher should have the qualification of B.A. Or B.Sc., Degree coupled with a B.Ed., degree for his appointment. Suppose if a B.T.Teacher has acquired the qualification of M.A., M.Ed., then he would be granted the first incentive increment for his M.A., Degree and Second incentive increment for his Initially the M.Ed., degree. Initially the M.Ed., qualification is the yardstick for the second increment for a B.T.Teacher. In order to curtail the above anomaly the G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 18.01.2013 was passed by the Government whereby the M.Phil., qualification is considered on par with M.Ed., qualification. As per the above G.O the eligibility qualification of getting the second incentive increment for B.T assistant is M.Ed., or M.Phil., or Ph.D. In fine a teacher would be entitled for only two incentive increment alone in his entire carrier for his acquired higher qualification.” 9/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 202514. From a reading of the above counter as well as the portion of the Government Order, wherein, it has been set out that the benefit of incentive increment to M.Phil., and Ph.D., was being made in consideration of the long pending demand/request, would indicate that the above G.O. itself was to remove an anomaly and clarificatory. That being the case, there is merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the restriction of the benefit only from the date of issuance of G.O(1D)No.18 dated 18.01.2013 instead of from the day following the last day of examination may not be valid. 15. Yet another reason why the impugned letter is illegal is also in view of the fact that any attempt at curtailing the benefit conferred by G.O(1D)No.18 by granting the same only from the date of the said G.O and not from the day following the last day of passing examination which entitles the candidate to benefit of increment would be contrary to Rule 26 of the Fundamental Rules of the Government of Tamil Nadu, which as seen supra provides in cases where the passing of an examination or test confers on a Government servant the title to any right, benefit or concession, such title should be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination or test which he passed. 16. It is trite law that a benefit conferred by a Government Order cannot be curtailed / whittled down / impaired by a letter. In view thereof the impugned letter dated 17.07.2023, insofar as 10/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025it curtails the benefit of second incentive only from the date of the above G.O. instead of granting the benefit from the day following the last day of the examination in terms of Rule 26 of the Fundamental Rules of the Government of Tamil Nadu is thus set aside. In view thereof, the recovery proceeding also cannot be sustained and consequently set aside. 17. Accordingly, the impugned letter dated 17.07.2013 is set aside and the Writ Petition stands disposed of on the basis of the above observations. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.” 8. Therefore, it is apparent that the impugned clarificatory letter dated 17.07.2013 has already been set aside. Apart from that, it is stipulated under Rule 26 that any benefit given based on a degree would accrue from the day following the last date of examination. Furthermore, the right conferred upon the employee based upon a Government Order, cannot be withdrawn by relying clarificatory letter. As already observed in A. Annakumar's case cited supra, the above issue was dealt and held that a benefit conferred by a Government Order cannot be curtailed, whittled down, or impaired by a subsequent letter.11/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 20259. At this juncture, the learned Special Government Pleader relied upon the judgment of this Court in N.S.Balasubramaniam's case cited supra, and would contend that this Court has held that the incentive increments for a M.Phil degree will have to be given prospectively with effect from 18.01.2013. However, on harmoniously reading the above judgment, it deals with a different fact. In contrast, in A. Annakumar's case cited supra, this Court has dealt with the identical issue in depth and ultimately found that the persons are entitled to the benefit for acquiring M.Phil degree, from the last date of their M.Phil examination.10. In such view of the same, this Court finds force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and as a sequel, the impugned orders dated 03.01.2025 and 02.04.2024 are hereby quashed and the respondents are directed to grant incentive increment for M.Phil qualification to the petitioners in the light of the proceedings issued by the concerned Assistant Elementary Educational Officer. 12/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 202511. In the result, these Writ Petitions are allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. 25.07.2025 kvIndex : Yes/NoSpeaking order /Non Speaking OrderNeutral Citation : Yes/NoTo1. The Secretary to Government, The Government of Tamil Nadu School Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.2. The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.3. The District Educational Officer, Karur District.4. The Block Educational Officer, K.Paramathi Block, Karur District.5. The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Karur District.6. The Block Educational Officer, Thanthoni Panchayat Union, Thanthoni, Karur District.13/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 2025C.KUMARAPPAN, J.kvW.P.Nos.16363 and 16372 of 202525.07.2025 14/14