Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7964/2019disposed of

N.Sekar, S/O.G.Narayasamy, v. The Principal Secretary To

2022-03-01Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.03.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM N.Sekar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Transport Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Managing Director, (Kumbakonam) Limited, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam-612 001.

3.The Administrator, Employees Pension Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 05.02.2019 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to revise the petitioner's pay scale appropriately on par with his juniors from April 2010, to pay the difference of salary from April 2010 to 31.07.2018 and to further direct the respondents to pay the retirement benefits to the petitioner on the basis of the revised pay within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For Respondent :

Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.P.Balasubramaniam for RR2 & 3

O R D E R

The order impugned states that the petitioner namely Mr.N.Sekar was working as Deputy Manager. Comparing one Mr.Elango, the petitioner has submitted an application for stepping up of his pay as the said Elango is junior to the petitioner.

2. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent made a submission that the alleged Elango is working as Deputy Manager (Technical).

3. As per the Common Service Rules, the Deputy Manager, (Technical) and Deputy Manager (Administrative) are not comparable and their service conditions are also different. Therefore, the case of the petitioner for stepping up of his pay on par with the Deputy Manager (Technical) cannot be granted. However, the petitioner is disputing the same. Such disputed facts are to be adjudicated on merits and with reference to the Rules by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner, if aggrieved, is at liberty to approach the Appellate Authority or the Government, as the case may be.

4. With this liberty, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar (LA & MC) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ssb To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Transport Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Managing Director, (Kumbakonam) Limited, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam-612 001.

3.The Administrator, Employees Pension Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

+1 CC to M/s.M.JERIN MATHEW,Advocate ( SR-9327[F] dated 01/03/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN,Advocate ( SR-9329[F] dated 01/03/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-9412[F] dated 02/03/2022 ) 01.03.2022 MGJ(16.03.2022) 3P 7C