R.Venkatesan, v. State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.02.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.NO.23673 OF 2012 R.Venkatesan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government School Education Department Secretariat, Chennai - 9.
2.Director of School Education Chennai - 6.
3.Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary) Chennai - 6.
4.Chief Educational Officer Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the fourth respondent in his Proceedings O.Mu.No.5023/A3/2011 dated 30.12.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to give fitment benefit to the petitioner applying multiplying 1.86 factor as issued in G.O.Ms.No.258, Finance Department, dated 23.06.2009 as amended in G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance Department, dated 26.08.2010 and accordingly fix the revised scale of pay to the petitioner and confer all the consequential benefits.
For Petitioner :
Mr.P.Ganesan for M/s.C.S.Associates For Respondents :
Mr.P.Raja Government Advocate
O R D E R
The petitioner was appointed as P.G. Assistant and joined service on 18.06.2009. His scale of pay was fixed at Rs.6500-200-10500. The fixation of pay scale was not proper in view of G.O.Ms.No.234, Finance Department, dated 01.06.2009. He is entitled to revision of pay scale and monetary benefit with effect from 01.01.2007. He made a representation on 07.09.2011 to the third respondent herein and the same was returned by way of impugned proceedings dated 30.12.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner has made another representation to the Chairman, Pay Grievance Redressal Cell on 02.05.2012. According to the petitioner, the Pay Grievance Redressal Cell will be functional only for three years. After that period, it will be attached to the concerned Department.
2. Eventhough the petitioner sought for a larger relief, he would restrict it to the effect that he will make a fresh representation to the first respondent for consideration and a direction may be issued to the first respondent to dispose the same on merits.
3. Considering the limited prayer, without going into the merits of the case, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the first respondent of his grievances within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the order and on receipt of such representation, the first respondent is directed to pass orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter.
4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar TK To 1.The Secretary to Government State of Tamil Nadu School Education Department Secretariat, Chennai - 9.
2. The Director of School Education Chennai - 6.
3.The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary) Chennai - 6.
4. The Chief Educational Officer Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
+1cc to M/s.C.S.Associates , Advocate SR.No.8869 W.P.NO.23673 OF 2012 BR(CO) GMY(24/09/2020)