In a writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to grant a second incentive increment based on his B.Ed. qualification. The Court held that eligibility for the second increment requires M.Phil., M.Ed., or Ph.D., not B.Ed., and dismissed the petition to prevent financial loss to the State.
Writ petition dismissed without ordering costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.11.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.22674 of 2014
R.Saravanan ... Petitioner
Vs
1.Government of Tamilnadu,
Rep.by Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Joint Director of School Education (Vocational),
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
4.The District Educational Officer,
Chennai East,
Jai Gopal Karodia (G) Higher Secondary School,
Choolaimedu High Road,
Chennai – 600 094. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to grant incentive increments to the petitioner for acquiring B.Ed., qualification and grant arrears of increments as per G.O.Ms.No.240, School Education (VE) Department, dated 18.8.2010.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.S.Sivasubramaniam
The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to grant incentive increments to the petitioner for acquiring B.Ed., qualification and grant arrears of increments as per G.O.Ms.No.240, School Education
(VE) Department, dated 18.8.2010. [hereinafter called as “G.O.Ms.No.240”].
the writ petitioner.
Sl Subject Basic Higher Qualification
.N Qualification Prescribed
o
1 st Incentive 2 nd Incentive
(Two Advance (Two Advance
Increments) Increments)
3. Accountancy B.Com.,with M.Com., M.Phil
and specializatio (or) (or)
Auditing n in Advanced B.Ed., M.Ed., (or)
Banking Ph.D.,
6.The first column denotes serial number, the second column is subject, the third column provides basic qualification and columns 4 and 5 state about higher qualification prescribed and one for grant of first incentive (two advance increments) and second incentive (two advance increments). Thus, there is no dispute in respect of the prescription of qualifications as per G.O.Ms.No.240. As per the said G.O.Ms.No.240, the writ petitioner acquired the basic qualification of B.Com.,with specialization in Advanced Banking. His appointment was provided on compassionate grounds and, his services were regularised in accordance with Rules in force. First incentive (two advance increments) was already granted to the writ petitioner by virtue of acquisition of the qualification of M.Com., degree. However, the second incentive (two advance increments) can be sanctioned only if the writ petitioner completes the degree of M.Phil., or M.Ed., or Ph.d. In other words, if the writ petitioner acquires the qualification of M.Phil., or M.Ed., or Ph.d., then only the petitioner is eligible to receive second incentive as per G.O.Ms.No.240. Admittedly, the writ petitioner has not possessed any one of the degrees as prescribed in the above G.O.Ms.No.240. In respect of the qualification prescribed in the fourth column, the writ petitioner has already received one incentive increment for the qualification of M.Com. Thus, the writ petitioner is not entitled for the second incentive as per the said G.O.Ms.No.240. When the policy in respect of grant of incentive increment has been unambiguous, as clarified in the G.O.Ms.No.240 cited
supra, the Courts cannot extend the scope of grant of incentives, because, the grant of incentives involves financial implications and any incorrect or erroneous grant in this regard will certainly cause financial loss to the State exchequer. All such incentive increments has been extended strictly by the Department in accordance with the policy taken by the Government and orders are passed in this regard.
7.This Court is of the opinion that the incentive increments are extended to the teaching staff to motivate them to acquire more qualification, which will be useful for the purpose of improving and imparting education in the educational institutions. Such incentives are granted by the Government as a policy in order to motivate the teachers working in schools and colleges. Thus, such additional incentive increments granted by way of an additional encouragement, is to be sanctioned strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the order passed by the Government in this regard.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ms
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
School Education Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Joint Director of School Education (Vocational),
College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
4.The District Educational Officer,
Chennai East,
Jai Gopal Karodia (G) Higher Secondary School,
Choolaimedu High Road,
Chennai – 600 094.
+1 cc to the Government pleader sr 78255
W.P.No.22674 of 2014
sr(co)
aa27/11/2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a second incentive increment for acquiring a B.Ed. qualification as per G.O.Ms.No.240.
Whether financial incentives under Government Orders can be granted prima facie without strict adherence to the prescribed higher degree qualifications.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Saravanan
Government of Tamilnadu
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
