G.Amali v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 02.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA W.P.No. 7452 of 2026 & W.M.P.Nos. 8028 & 8079 of 2026 G.Amali ...petitioners Vs.

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, School Education Department Fort St. George, Chennai.

2.The Director of Elementary Education College Road, Chennai - 6.

3.The District Educational Officer (Elementary) Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri 4.The Block Educational Officer Kelamangalam Panchayat Union Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District ...respondents 1/9

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th respondent in relation to the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.324/Al/ 2025, dated 18.06.2025 and dated 09.02.2026 issued by the 4th respondent and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to grant incentive increment for B.Ed in Computer Science and Mathematics to the petitioner continuously with all consequential benefits and arrears.

For petitioners :

Mr. R.Saseetharan For respondents :

Mrs. Mythryee Chandru Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for the following relief: "To call for the records of the 4th respondent in relation to the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.324/Al/ 2025, dated 18.06.2025 and dated 09.02.2026 issued by the 2/9

4th respondent and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to grant incentive increment for B.Ed in Computer Science and Mathematics to the petitioner continuously with all consequential benefits and arrears.."

2. The petitioner is a Primary School Head Master, working at Kelamangalam Panchayat Union, Krishnagiri District. She was initially appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher on 24.08.2007. The petitioner would submit that she acquired B.Sc. degree in Computer Science in November 2009 and B.Ed. in Computer Science and in Mathematics in May 2014.

3. By the proceedings dated 26.12.2015, the petitioner was granted an incentive increment for B.Ed. degree from 22.05.2014, following the last date of examination, as per G.O.Ms.No.42 dated 10.01.1969, G.O.Ms.No.324 dated 25.04.1995 and allowed to draw the same for all these 16 years in the scale of pay. 3/9

4. The petitioner would further submit that after a lapse of 16 years, by the impugned proceedings dated 18.06.2025 and 09.02.2026, the 4th respondent has cancelled the incentive increment granted and ordered for recovery of payment, already drawn from 22.05.2014 on the ground that B.Ed degree in Computer Science and Mathematics is not relevant degree for students. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

5. The impugned order has been passed for withdrawing incentive granted to the petitioner for having obtained B.Ed in Computer Science and Mathematics on the ground that she only teaches primary school and not higher secondary. Such a decision is contrary to the language of the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.324 dated 25.04.1995. The Government in the aforesaid Government Order had decided to stipulate higher secondary syllabus subjects as "relevant subjects" for the purpose of sanctioning incentive increment. 4/9

6. In paragraph 5 (ii) of the said Government Order, the Secretary to Government would state as follows:

"For the sanction of incentive increments the subjects in the Higher Secondary Syllabus shall be the relevant subjects.

7. A reading of the above would clearly show that qualification in any of the subjects in the higher secondary syllabus are the relevant subjects.

8. Admittedly, Computer Science and Mathematics are part of the higher secondary syllabus. The petitioner has admittedly qualified B.Ed degree in Computer Science and Mathematics.

9. In a similar case, the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2747 of 2023 dated 28.03.2025, had observed as follows: "Today the entire scheme for incentive increments has been withdrawn but the issue as to whether the said 5/9

withdrawal can be prospective and it cannot operate retrospectively still lingers. We do not see the need to go into the said issue as it is not germane to the facts on hand. Here the respondent has completed M.A.(Economics) in May 2010 and B.Ed in December 2015. Therefore, she is entitled to two sets of advance incentive increments for these two higher qualifications obtained by her. The question of whether MA (Economics) would be useful to the School students or not cannot be gone into by us, as the Government, in its wisdom, had in GO.(Ms).No.324 dated 25.04.1995, consciously decided to confer the benefit of the incentive increments on all teachers who obtained higher qualifications in any subject found in the higher secondary syllabus.

10. The above discussion would apply on all fours of this case. The petitioner has acquired her B,Sc. Computer Science in November 2009 and B.Ed in Computer Science and in Mathematics in May 2014. 6/9

11. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed and the respondents are directed to grant incentive increment for B.Ed in Computer Science and Mathematics to the petitioner continuously with all consequential benefits and arrears. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

02.03.2026 kan 7/9

To 1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, School Education Department Fort St. George, Chennai.

2.The Director of Elementary Education College Road, Chennai - 6.

3.The District Educational Officer (Elementary) Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri 4.The Block Educational Officer Kelamangalam Panchayat Union Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District 8/9

P.T. ASHA, J kan 02.03.2026 9/9