A. Sobana Ponrani v. The Financial Advisor And The Principal Accounts Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 08/04/2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and WMP(MD)Nos.6259, 6266,6268, 6263, 6265 and 6262 of 2026 In WP(MD)No.7653 of 2026:

A. Sobana Ponrani ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Financial Advisor and ThePrincipal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni,Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Vaikkalparai, Theni District-625 579.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 24.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Court. In WP(MD). No.7654 of 2026:

S.Komala ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Financial Advisor and the Principal Accounts Officer, Office of the Directorate of School Education, 1/10

DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Vaikkalparai, Theni District-625 579.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Honble Court.

In WP(MD). No.7655 of 2026:

G.Anusuya ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Financial Advisor and The Principal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Thekkampatti, Theni District-625 517.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Honble Court.

2/10

In WP(MD). No.7656 of 2026:

S.Ananthakumaran ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Financial Advisor and The Principal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Thekkampatti, Theni District-625 517.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Court. In WP(MD). No.7657 of 2026:

A.Murugaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Financial Advisor and The Principal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Vaikkalparai, Theni District-625 579.

... Respondents 3/10

PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Court. In WP(MD). No.7658 of 2026:

T.Nagarajan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Financial Advisor and The Principal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni,Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Thekkampatti, Theni District-625 579.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to drop the audit objection raised with regard to the incentive increment already granted to the petitioner for acquiring M.Phil qualification by considering the Representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2025 within the time period stipulated by this Court. In all writ petitions:

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Aswin Raja Simman For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader C O M M O N O R D E R The issue that arises for consideration in all these writ petitions is one and the same. Hence, all the matters are taken up for consideration together and disposed of by this common order. 4/10

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. All the petitioners herein have acquired M.Phil./Ph.D degree from Indira Gandhi National Open University in non-technical programs in Regular (Full time/Part time) mode and basing upon the said degree acquired by the petitioners, they have made a claim for grant of incentive increments and accordingly, they were all granted incentive increments.

4. However, an objection appears to have been raised by the audit on the said award of incentive increments in favour of the petitioners requiring to recover certain amounts paid to the petitioners towards the said incentive increment. It was at that stage the petitioners claims to have submitted individual representations on various dates bringing to the notice of the first respondent about their legal entitlement to draw incentive increment.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the 5/10

incentive increments that were granted in favour of the petitioners are all in accordance with law and as per their legal entitlement and the objection raised by the audit is liable to be dropped by considering the representations submitted by the petitioners. However, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the representations that are submitted by the petitioners are not being considered by the respondents. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court by filling the present writ petitions.

6. The third respondent filed a counter affidavit. Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, placing reliance on the said counter affidavit, contends that the audit objection raised by the audit is under consideration by the respondents and veracity and correctness of the said objection would be verified and in case, if the same is found to be sustainable, the petitioners will be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action either for recovery or otherwise and therefore, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed as premature.

7. Taking into consideration the submissions made on either 6/10

side and also having perused the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the relief sought in the present writ petitions is only for consideration of their respective representations requesting for dropping of the audit objection. From the counter affidavit also it is evident that the respondents are examining veracity and correctness and sustainability of the audit objection. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents in case if the representations submitted by the petitioners are taken into consideration while examining correctness or otherwise of the audit objections raised against the incentive increments awarded in favour of the petitioners. Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, it is a fit case to issue appropriate directions to the respondents to consider the stand of the petitioners herein while testing correctness or otherwise of the audit objection raised against the grant of incentive increments that were granted in favour of the petitioners long back.

8. Since all the representations appears to have been submitted before the third respondent, this Court deems it appropriate to permit the petitioners to submit fresh representations before the second respondent for consideration of the same while testing veracity and correctness of the audit objection.

7/10

9. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of permitting the petitioners to submit fresh representations before the second respondent in support of their contentions and their entitlement to have the incentive increment for having acquired M.Phil degree within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On submission of the said representations, the second respondent shall consider the same while taking decision on the audit objection raised against the incentive increments awarded in favour of the petitioners. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

08.04.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No CM 8/10

To,

1. The Financial Advisor and ThePrincipal Accounts Officer, Directorate of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. The Chief Educational Officer, Theni,Theni District..

3. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Vaikkalparai, Theni District-625 579.

9/10

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR,J CM and WMP(MD)Nos.6259, 6266,6268, 6263, 6265 and 626 of 2026 08/04/2026 10/10