The State of Tamil Nadu Vs N.Kumar — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs N.Kumar — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 05.03.2024 in W.P.No.6655 of 2020 set aside; no order as to costs; connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition CMP No.1392 of 2025 closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the issues raised in the present intra-court writ appeal (challenging the order dated 05.03.2024 in W.P.No.6655 of 2020 concerning vocational instructors appointed under G.O.Ms.No.129 dated 18.05.1999 r/w G.O.Ms.No.6 dated 04.01.2000) remain open, or are concluded by the Full Bench rulings in P.L.S. Palaniappan and S. Rajaram.

Court's answer

The issues raised in the intra-court appeal are no longer res integra; the Full Bench of this Court has already considered and answered the references in Government of Tamilnadu v. P.L.S. Palaniappan (2026:MHC:2255), and no reconsideration is required.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court (P.L.S. Palaniappan, 2026:MHC:2255), the order impugned in the present appeal dated 05.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.6655 of 2020 is set aside.

Key takeaways

The Writ Appeal stands allowed; however, there shall be no order as to costs, and the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition (CMP No.1392 of 2025) is closed.ratio¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras, Division Bench of S.M. Subramaniam and N. Senthilkumar, JJ. (judgment authored by S.M. Subramaniam, J.), by judgment dated 16.07.2026 in W.A.No.202 of 2025 (neutral citation 2026:MHC:2936), allowed the writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent by the State of Tamil Nadu (Finance and School Education Departments), the Director of School Education and the Joint Director (Vocational) against N. Kumar, J. Prabhu, S. Ravichandar, K.S. Sampath Nagaraja, T. Namasivayam and R. Balasubramaniyan, and set aside the order dated 05.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.6655 of 2020. Holding the issues no longer res integra, the Court followed its Full Bench judgment in Government of Tamilnadu v. P.L.S. Palaniappan, 2026:MHC:2255, reproducing its paragraphs 2 to 4: the earlier Full Bench ruling in Secretary, School Education Department, Chennai v. S. Rajaram, W.A.(MD).No.201 of 2021 dated 05.03.2021 — which had held that vocational instructors appointed under G.O.Ms.No.129 dated 18.05.1999 r/w G.O.Ms.No.6 dated 04.01.2000 (all streams placed in the very same time scale of pay of Rs.5500 – 175 – 9000) constitute a separate class distinct from G. Narayanasamy and Vasimalai, and that Article 14 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for perpetuating illegality (citing State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai, (2009) 13 SCC 635), the order dated 21.01.2019 in W.A.No.1040 of 2019 (Kalarani) notwithstanding — was confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, SLP.No.16732/2022 having been dismissed on 26.09.2022, making the Full Bench judgment final. Consequently, the Writ Appeal stood allowed with no order as to costs and the connected CMP No.1392 of 2025 was closed. Dr. R. Gouri, Government Counsel, appeared for the appellants; respondents 1 to 5 did not appear; Mrs. C. Uma appeared for respondent 6.

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.07.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR

W.A.NO.202 OF 2025 AND

CMP NO.1392 OF 2025

1.The State of Tamil Nadu

Rep. By its Secretary to Government Finance Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The State of Tamil Nadu

Rep. By its Secretary to Government School Education Department Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

3.The Director of School Education DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

4.The Joint Director (Vocational) Directorate of School Education DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

… Appellants

Vs.

1.N.Kumar 2.J.Prabhu

Page No.1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

3.S.Ravichandar 4.K.S.Sampath Nagaraja 5.T.Namasivayam 6.R.Balasubramaniyan … Respondents

PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 05.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.6655 of 2020.

For Appellants : Dr.R.Gouri Government Counsel For Respondents 1 – 5 : No appearance For Respondent – 6 : Mrs.C.Uma

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam, J.)

The issues raised in the present intra Court appeal are no longer res integra . The Full Bench of this Court has considered the issues and answered the references in the case of Government of Tamilnadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Chennai Vs. P.L.S.Palaniappan and Others, reported in 2026:MHC:2255 . Paragraph Nos.2, 3 and 4 of the said judgment reads as under:

‘ 2.The Hon'ble Chief Justice constituted this Full

Bench and when the matter is taken up for hearing, the

Page No.2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

learned Government Advocate at Chennai as well as the learned Government Pleader from Madurai would submit that the issues raised in the Writ Appeal have already been decided by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of the

State rep. by its Secretary, School Education Department, Chennai vs. S.Rajaram and others in W.A. (MD).No.201/2021 dated 05.03.2021 . The learned Government Advocate would rely on paragraph Nos.18 ad 19 of the judgment, which reads as under.

“ 18.We still have to deal with the order dated 21.01.2019 made in W.A.No.1040 of 2019 (The Government of Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal Secretary, School Educational Department Vs Kalarani & others). It is true that the case of the respondents therein is similar to that of the respondents herein. It also appears that the order dated 21.01.2019 in W.A.No.1040 of 2019 had attained finality. Yet, we are of the view that the present writ appeal cannot be governed by the order dated 21.01.2019 for more than one reason. The Division Bench which dismissed W.A.No.1040 of 2019 was under

Page No.3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

the impression that the vocational instructors (Agriculture) and vocational instructors in other streams though discharge identical duties, were placed in different time scales. It is not so. A mere look at G.O.Ms.No.6 dated 04.01.2000 is enough to dispel the same. The vocational instructors whether for Home Science, Commerce and Business and Agricultural, Engineering and Technology, Health or Photography and Music have been placed in the very same time scale of pay of Rs.5500 – 175 – 9000. Secondly, the Division Bench took the view that the decisions rendered in G.Narayanasamy and Vasimalai should be followed. We have already held that vocational instructors appointed under G.O.Ms.No.129, dated 18.05.1999 r/w G.O.Ms.No.6, dated 04.01.2000 constitute a separate class distinct from the one to which G.Narayanasamy and Vasimalai belonged.

WA NO.202 OF 2025

19.It is well settled that Article 14 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for perpetuating illegality. A wrong order passed in one case cannot be made the basis for compelling a public authority to

Page No.4 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

pass similar order in any other case. Even if the State implements an erroneous order passed by the Court, it cannot be precluded from challenging a similar order passed in another case, simply because appeal was not preferred in the earlier case (Paragraph No.17 in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ramesh Chandra Bajpai, reported in (2009) 13 SCC 635).”

3.The SLP.No.16732/2022 filed challenging the judgment of the Full Bench cited supra came to be dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 26.09.2022. Thus, the judgment rendered by the Full Bench became final and the said judgment may be followed for deciding the individual cases.

4.Since the Full Bench judgment, in the case of Secretary, School Education Department, Chennai Vs. S.Rajaram, passed in W.A.(MD).No.201 of 2021, has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, reconsideration of the issues involved is not required. Consequently, the question of constituting a Larger Bench does not arise at all. The issues are answered accordingly.”

Page No.5 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

2.In view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court cited

supra, the order impugned in the present appeal dated 05.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.6655 of 2020 is set aside. Consequently, the Writ Appeal stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

[S.M.S., J.] [N.S., J.] 16.07.2026 Index : Yes Speaking Order : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes TK

Page No.6 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

Page No.7 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2026:MHC:2936

WA NO.202 OF 2025

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

TK

W.A.NO.202 OF 2025

16.07.2026

Page No.8 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis