Divided Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a Writ Appeal filed by a retired teacher seeking arrears of pay and pension revision from 1997. The Court upheld the lower court's dismissal based on inordinate delay and laches, citing the Supreme Court precedent Ramachandra Shankar Deodhar.
The Writ Appeal was dismissed; no costs awarded.
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 : 22.01.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Writ Appeal No.2710 of 2019
S.Mani
S/o.Sabapathi ...Appellant/Petitioner
Chennai – 600009.
Chennai – 600006.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act against the order passed in W.P.No.6922 of 2019 dated 11.03.2019.
PRAYER IN W.P.No.6922 of 2019: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the benefits granted to Similarly Placed Persons by the G.O.(Ms) No. 234, School Education (G2) Department dated 10.09.2009 and to pay the arrears of pay based on the revised scale for the period from 21.07.1997 to 31.05.2010 and revise the pension arrear accordingly and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.
For Appellant : Ms.Kanimozhi Sundar For Respondents : Mr.C.Munusamy Special Government Pleader (Edn.) for RR 1 to 4
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBBIAH, J]
This matter is heard through Video Conference.
also paid to them. The appellant was also granted Selection Grade and Special Grade vide proceedings of fourth respondent dated 03.04.2012, by conferring the scale of pay in the Grade of Selection Grade and Special Grade as Elementary School Head Master. However, the appellant was given arrears only with effect from 01.06.2010 and he was not given arrears with effect from 21.07.1997, the date on which the appellant was awarded Selection Grade even though he is entitled for arrears of pay and revised pension based on G.O.(Ms) No.234, Education Department, dated 10.09.2009. In this regard, appellant submitted several representations to respondents on various dates since the year 2013. The appellant finally submitted a detailed representation dated 24.12.2018 to all the respondents. Since no action was taken on the representations, appellant filed W.P.No.6922 of 2019 before this Court seeking a direction to respondents to re-fix his pay by extending the benefits granted in G.O.Ms.No.234, School Education, dated 10.09.2009 and to pay the arrears of revised scale for the period from 21.07.1997 to 31.05.2010 and to revise his pension accordingly. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition on the ground of delay and laches following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ramachandra Shankar Deodhar and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others [1974 (1) SCC 317]. Hence, this appeal.
Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Sub-Assistant Registrar
gm
| To | |
|---|---|
| 1. |
The Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St.George, Chenani – 600009. |
| 2. |
The Director of Elementary Education, D.P.I. Complex, College Road, Chennai – 600006. |
| 3. | The District Elementary Officer, |
| The District Elementary Education Office, Madhuranthagam, Kancheepuram District. |
|
| 4. |
The Block Education Officer, Maduranthagam, Kancheepuram District. |
| +1 | cc to the Government Pleader, SR.No.4015 |
Writ Appeal No.2710 of 2019 KV(CO) KKV/10/03/2021
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition should be dismissed due to inordinate delay and laches?
Whether the appellant is entitled to arrears of pay and revised pension from the earlier date of service?
Whether the Court is justified in rejecting the claim based on the precedent Ramachandra Shankar Deodhar?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ramachandra Shankar Deodhar and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and othersExplained¶26
Ramachandra Shankar Deodhar and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others [1974 (1) SCC 317] · Who else cites this
S.Mani
State of Tamil Nadu
District Elementary Officer
Block Education Officer
R.SUBBIAH
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
