← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/14610/2014dismissed

S. Murugan, v. The Secretary To Government

2022-11-23Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy10 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY 1.S.Murugan 2.R.Karuppan 3.P.Raju 4.K.Chinnan 5.Aarayee 6.T.Pappathi 7.K.Subramanian 8.R.Palanisamy 9.Krishnan @ Kitan 10.Karuppusamy ... Petitioners vs.

1.The Secretary to Government, HR and CE Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

2.The Commissioner, HR and CE Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Street, Nungambakam, Chennai-34.

1/10

3.The Joint Commissioner, Arulmigu Thandayuthapani Thiru Kovil, Palani, Dindigul District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to G.O.Ms.No.93, dated 12.06.2014, on the file of the 1st respondent herein and to quash the same consequently, to direct the respondents to fix the salary as per G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998 ant to pay the arrears with accrued interest. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Karthik For R1 & 2 : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.Murali for Mr.K.Govindarajan *****

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned G.O.Ms.No.93, dated 12.06.2014 and consequently to direct the respondents to fix the salary as per G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998 and to pay the arrears with accrued interest.

2/10

2. The contention of the petitioners is that they joined as Thotti in the 3rd respondent temple on various dates. The 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to fix the salary to the temple workers. The workers were divided into two categories, namely, Grade I temple workers and Grade II temple workers. The petitioners were working under the 3rd respondent temple, which is classified as Grade I temple workers. In G.O.Ms.No. 257 under annex 6 entry 6 of annexure (1), the salary was fixed as Rs. 2610-60-3150-45, for the Thottis along with other similar categories. The scale of pay was given in two categories, one is selection grade 3200-85-4900 and the other is special grade 4000-100-6000. The respondents 2 and 3 did not follow the scale of pay as fixed in G.O.Ms.No.257, but had followed the earlier pay of consolidated pay of Rs.3,050/- from the year 1997 to 2006. The increment which came under the 5th pay commission was not paid to the petitioners who were working for more than 27 years.

3/10

3. Further contention of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings, dated 21.05.2009 and 02.11.2011, had granted pay fixation as per G.O.Ms.No.257, to the category "Esaipaniyalargal" along with arrears. But they have not paid the scale of pay prescribed under the said G.O. to the petitioners who are under the category "Thottis", hence, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition seeking to implement the G.O. to them.

4. The respondents have filed counter affidavit stating that the writ petitioners are not entitled to get the salary as claimed by them and they have not approached this Court with clean hands. The petitioners are all retired employees and hence, the present claim of refixation cannot be granted. The petitioners were appointed as Sweepers in the 3rd respondent Temple which is a single grade temple. The temple administration by properly following the Government orders which are in force during the relevant time has paid the salary to the petitioners. The petitioners are claiming selection grade pay as Rs.3200-85-4900 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998 and the same is not applicable. Since the 4/10

Government by letter, dated 10.11.1998, issued orders to pay the ordinary grade scale of pay of Rs.2610-60-3150-65-3540 in tune with the servants in the Government service.

5. Further the temple employees are not considered as Government employees. The temple administration is paying the salary as per the Government guidelines issued to the temples. The petitioners are receiving temple servants pension scheme and are receiving the consolidated pension as fixed by the Government. The petitioners approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(MD)No. 744 of 2013 to consider the claim for revision of pay and this Court directed the respondents therein to consider and pass orders. Thereafter, the Government after considering the issue on merits had passed the impugned Government order G.O.Ms.No.93, dated 12.06.2014. Hence, the respondents submitted that the order of the 1st respondent is legally sustainable and prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

5/10

6.Heard Mr.S.Karthik, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Murali, learned Counsel appearing for 3rd respondent and perused the records.

7. The learned Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent submitted that the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998, thereafter, certain discrepancies were pointed out. Hence, the Government directed the 3rd respondent to pay the salary as stated in the Government letter, dated 10.11.1998 and the relevant portion of the letter is extracted here under: "muRf; fbjk; vz;.13850/mep4-1/98> jkpo;tsh;r;rp> mwepiyak; kw;Wk; nra;jpj; Jiw ehs; 10.11.1998-d;gb Nkw;fz;l %d;W rk;gs Vw;w KiwfSf;F kl;Lk; fPo;f;fz;lthW jpUj;jpa rk;gs Vw;w Kiw eph;zapj;J Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;Wk; njhptpj;Js;shh;. t.vz; rk;gs Vw;w Kiw Njh;Tepiy rpwg;Gepiy 1.

&.3200-85-4900 &.4000-100-6000 &.4300-100-6000 2.

&.2610-60-3150-65-3540 &.2750-70-3800-75-4400 &.3050-75-3250-80-4590 3.

&.2550-55-2660-60-3200 &.2610-60-3150-65-3540 &.2750-70-3800-75-4400"

6/10

8.Admittedly in G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998, the following slab was introduced:

t.vz; rk;gs Vw;w Kiw Njh;Tepiy rpwg;Gepiy 1.

&.3200-85-4900 &.4000-100-6000 &.5000-150-7000 2.

&.2610-60-3150-65-3540 &.3200-85-4900 &.4000-100-600 3.

&.2550-55-2660-60-3200 &.2610-60-3150-65-3540 &.3200-85-4900 Subsequently, in the aforesaid Government letter, the tabulation was granted. The discrepancy in the above two tabulations is that while granting the ordinary time scale of pay, G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1998, has fixed the salary that would be granted to the Government servants. However, in the selection grade and special grade fixation, there was a steep rise in the basic salary which was brought to the knowledge of the Government. Thereafter, the Government has issued the subsequent tabulation in which the special grade and selection grade was fixed in appropriate scale of pay from the date of issuance of the said Government letter. Subsequent tabulation is followed throughout Tamil Nadu. However, there was repeated representations by the employees and they had filed 7/10

W.P.(MD)No.744 of 2013, wherein this Court directed to consider and pass orders. After considering the claim of the petitioners, the present impugned G.O.Ms.No.93, dated 12.06.2014, was passed and the reason for refixing has also been stated in the Government order.

9. On perusal of the said G.O., the Government has clearly stated that there was discrepancy and it was rectified through the Government letter. The respondents were directed to refix the salary as per the Government letter and that was confirmed in G.O.Ms.No.93, dated 12.06.2014. As rightly pointed out by the respondents, Temple employees cannot be considered as government employees. Even the Municipal employees, Board employees and Corporation employees cannot be considered as Government employees. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to claim any salary fixation on par with Government employees. Hence, the claim of the petitioners cannot be considered. Moreover, the petitioners are all retired employees.

8/10

10. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. This Court also refrains from interfering with the policy decision of the Government. The petitioners have not raised legal grounds to entertain this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Index : Yes / No 23.11.2022 Internet : Yes (1/2) Tmg To 1.The Secretary to Government, HR and CE Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2.The Commissioner, HR and CE Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Street, Nungambakam, Chennai-34.

9/10

S.SRIMATHY, J Tmg 23.11.2022 (1/2) 10/10