✦ High Court of India · 19 Jun 2025

Madrasdated High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 19 Jun 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
19 Jun 2025
Bench
The learned single
Length
1,750 words

8/15WP No. 17788 of 2025Respondent(s)WP No. 17788 of 2025PRAYERcalling for the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.1.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examinations part-I within the period that may by stipulated by this Court.WMP No. 20055 of 2025PRAYERto dispense with the production of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.1.2025 for the presentWMP No. 20056 of 2025PRAYERto grant an ad interim direction to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examination part I pending disposal of the above writ petitionWP No. 17788 of 2025For Petitioner(s):Ms. H.Jasima Yasmin For M/s. Ajmal AssociatesFor Respondent(s):Mr.K.Tippu Sultan, Govt.Advocate For R1 To R6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/15WP No. 17788 of 2025ORDERThis writ petition has been filed to issue a Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially, to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examinations part-I within the period that may by stipulated by this Court.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner was initially appointed as Typist on 02.02.2015 and his appointment has been regularised with effect from his date of initial appointment and his probation was declared on 01.02.2017. Similarly, the petitioners 2 to 4 were also appointed as Junior Assistants during 2015, 2017 and 2019 and their services have been regularised with effect from their respective date of appointment and their probation was also declared from their respective date of completion of 2 years. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners' increment https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/15WP No. 17788 of 2025was denied for not passing the Account Test, but on the sole ground that the advance increment proposal was sent after 10.03.2020. It is the submission of the petitioners that according to G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.2020, it only mandates that the individual has to pass the Account Test before 10.03.2020 and that it does say anything about time limit for sending of proposal . Therefore, the delay on the part of the administrative side in sending the proposal cannot be put against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also rely upon the judgement of this Court passed in W.P (MD) No.5580 of 2025 dated 21.03.2025 and contend that similar impugned order has already been quashed by this Court and hence, prayed to allow this writ petition. 4. However, learned Government Advocate strongly objected the contention of the petitioners and would submit that though the petitioners passed the Account Test prior to 10.03.2020 as mentioned in G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.2020, the proposal was sent belatedly. Therefore, he justify the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/15WP No. 17788 of 2025impugned order. 5. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials on record.6. While giving clarification, it was clarified that the G.O. (Ms) No.37 dated 10.03.2020 will come into force only from that day. It is the submission of the petitioners that according to G.O.(Ms) No.37, though the Government has taken policy decision not to give any increment for the individuals who have not passed the Account Test, has held that it must be given to the individuals those who have passed the Account Test before 10.03.2020, where in the case on hand, all the petitioners have passed the Account Test during 2015, 2017 and 2018. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also invites the attention of this Court about the order passed in W.P No.5580 of 2020 dated 21.03.2025, wherein in para 5 and 6, this Court had observed as follows:5.Admittedly, in the present case, the petitioners 1 to 4 passed the Account Test on 16.03.2019, 07.08.2018, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 12/15WP No. 17788 of 202507.08.2019 and 16.03.2020 respectively. As per the order extracted herein above passed by this Court in identical matter, the petitioners 1 to 3, who have cleared the Account Test for Subordinate Officer Part-I prior to 10.03.2020 and their applications for grant of incentive increment are pending who have not made any application are eligible for incentive increment in terms of the relevant Government Orders dehors G.O.(Ms) No.37, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (FR-IV), dated 10.03.2020.6. In view of the above, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners 1 to 3 are entitled for the relief sought in this writ petition. The fourth petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought in view of the fact that he cleared the Account Test only on 16.03.2020.8. The learned single Judge after gone into the G.O, had made a categorical observation that whenever application for grant of incentive increment are pending and the individuals who have not made any application, are eligible for incentive increment, if they have passed the Account Test before 10.03.2020. Even the petitioners herein are also similarly placed persons. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that the impugned order dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/15WP No. 17788 of 202531.01.2025 is contravention to the spirit of G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.220, which contention was already approved by this Court in Thirumalaikumar's case cited supra. 9. In view of the same, this Court finds that there is a force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.19-06-2025uma(2/2)Index:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 14/15WP No. 17788 of 2025To1.The State Of TamilnaduRep By Its Additional Chief Secretary To Government, The Medical And Rural Health Services Department, Secretariat, Chennai2.The State Of TamilnaduRep By Its Additional Chief Secretary To Government, Personnel And Administrative Reforms(fr-iv)department, Secretariat, Chennai3.The Director Of Medical And Rural Health ServicesThe Directorate Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Teynampet, Chennai4.The Joint Director Of Medical And RuralHealth Services, O/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Perambalur District5.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural HealthServices, O/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Nilgiris District6.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health ServicesO/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Krishangiri District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 15/15WP No. 17788 of 2025C.KUMARAPPAN J. umaWP No. 17788 of 2025AND WMP NO. 20055 OF 2025,WMP NO. 20056 OF 202519-06-2025

8/15WP No. 17788 of 2025Respondent(s)WP No. 17788 of 2025PRAYERcalling for the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.1.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examinations part-I within the period that may by stipulated by this Court.WMP No. 20055 of 2025PRAYERto dispense with the production of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.1.2025 for the presentWMP No. 20056 of 2025PRAYERto grant an ad interim direction to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examination part I pending disposal of the above writ petitionWP No. 17788 of 2025For Petitioner(s):Ms. H.Jasima Yasmin For M/s. Ajmal AssociatesFor Respondent(s):Mr.K.Tippu Sultan, Govt.Advocate For R1 To R6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/15WP No. 17788 of 2025ORDERThis writ petition has been filed to issue a Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his letter No.3975/AA2/2024 dated 18.11.2024 communicated to the petitioners vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 31.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially, to direct the respondents to sanction the advance increment to the petitioners for passing the Account Test Examinations part-I within the period that may by stipulated by this Court.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner was initially appointed as Typist on 02.02.2015 and his appointment has been regularised with effect from his date of initial appointment and his probation was declared on 01.02.2017. Similarly, the petitioners 2 to 4 were also appointed as Junior Assistants during 2015, 2017 and 2019 and their services have been regularised with effect from their respective date of appointment and their probation was also declared from their respective date of completion of 2 years. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners' increment https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/15WP No. 17788 of 2025was denied for not passing the Account Test, but on the sole ground that the advance increment proposal was sent after 10.03.2020. It is the submission of the petitioners that according to G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.2020, it only mandates that the individual has to pass the Account Test before 10.03.2020 and that it does say anything about time limit for sending of proposal . Therefore, the delay on the part of the administrative side in sending the proposal cannot be put against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also rely upon the judgement of this Court passed in W.P (MD) No.5580 of 2025 dated 21.03.2025 and contend that similar impugned order has already been quashed by this Court and hence, prayed to allow this writ petition. 4. However, learned Government Advocate strongly objected the contention of the petitioners and would submit that though the petitioners passed the Account Test prior to 10.03.2020 as mentioned in G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.2020, the proposal was sent belatedly. Therefore, he justify the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/15WP No. 17788 of 2025impugned order. 5. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials on record.6. While giving clarification, it was clarified that the G.O. (Ms) No.37 dated 10.03.2020 will come into force only from that day. It is the submission of the petitioners that according to G.O.(Ms) No.37, though the Government has taken policy decision not to give any increment for the individuals who have not passed the Account Test, has held that it must be given to the individuals those who have passed the Account Test before 10.03.2020, where in the case on hand, all the petitioners have passed the Account Test during 2015, 2017 and 2018. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also invites the attention of this Court about the order passed in W.P No.5580 of 2020 dated 21.03.2025, wherein in para 5 and 6, this Court had observed as follows:5.Admittedly, in the present case, the petitioners 1 to 4 passed the Account Test on 16.03.2019, 07.08.2018, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 12/15WP No. 17788 of 202507.08.2019 and 16.03.2020 respectively. As per the order extracted herein above passed by this Court in identical matter, the petitioners 1 to 3, who have cleared the Account Test for Subordinate Officer Part-I prior to 10.03.2020 and their applications for grant of incentive increment are pending who have not made any application are eligible for incentive increment in terms of the relevant Government Orders dehors G.O.(Ms) No.37, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (FR-IV), dated 10.03.2020.6. In view of the above, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners 1 to 3 are entitled for the relief sought in this writ petition. The fourth petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought in view of the fact that he cleared the Account Test only on 16.03.2020.8. The learned single Judge after gone into the G.O, had made a categorical observation that whenever application for grant of incentive increment are pending and the individuals who have not made any application, are eligible for incentive increment, if they have passed the Account Test before 10.03.2020. Even the petitioners herein are also similarly placed persons. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that the impugned order dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/15WP No. 17788 of 202531.01.2025 is contravention to the spirit of G.O (Ms) No.116 dated 15.10.220, which contention was already approved by this Court in Thirumalaikumar's case cited supra. 9. In view of the same, this Court finds that there is a force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.19-06-2025uma(2/2)Index:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 14/15WP No. 17788 of 2025To1.The State Of TamilnaduRep By Its Additional Chief Secretary To Government, The Medical And Rural Health Services Department, Secretariat, Chennai2.The State Of TamilnaduRep By Its Additional Chief Secretary To Government, Personnel And Administrative Reforms(fr-iv)department, Secretariat, Chennai3.The Director Of Medical And Rural Health ServicesThe Directorate Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Teynampet, Chennai4.The Joint Director Of Medical And RuralHealth Services, O/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Perambalur District5.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural HealthServices, O/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Nilgiris District6.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health ServicesO/o.The Joint Director Of Medical And Rural Health Services, Krishangiri District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 15/15WP No. 17788 of 2025C.KUMARAPPAN J. umaWP No. 17788 of 2025AND WMP NO. 20055 OF 2025,WMP NO. 20056 OF 202519-06-2025

Find similar cases Start drafting free
This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments