____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved onPronounced on

02.02.2026

11.02.2026

13.06.2026

16.02.2026

18.02.2026

20.02.2026

25.02.2026

26.02.2026

27.02.2026

02.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.P. NOS. 12275, 12350, 17118, 18070, 18456, 27165, 27192, 27197,

27202, 27207, 27180, 27184, 27189, 27464, 28330, 28334, 28336,

28339, 29516, 29521, 29524 OF 2024

W.P. NOS. 11197, 14081, 19434, 19481, 33090, 45621, 45628, 45652, 45647,

45658, 45605, 45611, 45618, 45620, 45633, 45639, 45643, 33541, 34841, 35241,

35268, 36104, 36129, 36108, 36123,36548, 36558, 36701, 36709, 36803, 36812,

36818, 36881, 36891, 36896, 37356, 37403, 37412, 37420, 37424, 37427, 37480,

38116, 38123, 40287, 40358, 41687, 41696, 41701, 40407, 41707, 41713, 40608,

40671, 40684, 40692, 40681, 40673, 40676, 40680, 40987, 40993,41926, 41932,

42396, 42415, 42417, 42418, 42425, 42421, 42406, 42408, 43173, 43183, 43193,

43186, 43187, 43192, 43194, 43195, 43228, 43224,43189, 43197, 43198, 43200,

43201, 43203, 43204, 43205, 43206, 43208, 44365, 44496, 44500, 44499, 44517,

44504, 44507, 44509, 44511, 44512, 44514, 44516, 44503, 44553, 44846, 44855,

45339, 45686, 45707, 45724, 45696, 46011, 46776, 46786, 46794, 46804, 46805,

46810, 46813, 46821, 46840, 46849, 47210, 47351, 47814, 47819, 47822, 47851,

47856, 47886, 47889, 47863, 47914, 47871, 47877, 47882, 47890, 47899, 47904,

48330, 48339, 48364, 48374, 48386, 48396, 49028, 49042, 49084, 49051, 49058,

49047, 49088, 49036, 49045, 49062, 49076, 49179, 49783, 50159, 50198 &

50238 OF 2025

1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

W.P. NOS. 212, 250, 260, 221, 223, 220, 226, 231, 232, 234, 243, 268, 296, 647,

653, 738, 812, 751, 757, 761, 784, 787, 789, 795, 796, 797, 798, 800, 805, 811,

748, 2122, 2156, 2161, 2168, 2213, 2216, 2232, 2234, 2167, 2130, 2133, 2134,

2135, 2140, 2143, 2144, 2145, 2149, 2154, 2218, 2226, 2973, 4458, 4469, 4476,

4481, 4482, 4486, 4488, 4490, 4492, 4495, 4500, 4503, 4509, 4607, 4613, 4622,

4626, 4029, 3781, 3788, 4029, 5433, 5438, 7388, 7409, 7411, 7413, 7414, 7417,

7569, 7392, 7395, 7406, 6981, 7378, 7382, 7592, 7603 & 8115 OF 2026

AND

W.M.P. NOS. 27266, 13369, 13370, 13463, 31064, 18890,18891,19862, 19863,

20248, 20250, 29694, 29701, 29704, 29689, 29668, 29692,50213, 29671, 29672,

29682, 29683, 29685, 29693, 29699, 29700, 29715,29706, 29690, 29714, 29687,

29691, 29705, 29686, 29713, 29684, 29968, 29969, 29967, 30892, 30893, 30894,

30895, 30896, 30898, 30904, 30891, 30900, 30901, 30902, 30903,32177, 32182,

32172 OF 2024

W.M.P. NOS. 8011, 48911, 50212, 48912,50772,33334, 17167, 23705, 23707,

12630, 15828, 15829, 15830, 21774, 21696, 50831, 37167, 50810, 50829, 50849,

50850, 50863, 37161, 50811, 50816, 50819, 50823, 50824, 50864, 50871, 50873,

37688, 37689, 37693, 39024, 39455, 39456, 39480, 39484, 40348, 40359, 40349,

40357, 40377, 40854, 41054, 41049, 41050, 41055, 41166, 41169, 41176, 41178,

41190, 41191, 41247, 41249, 41265, 41266, 41279, 41282, 41794, 41794, 41839,

41873, 41877, 41878, 41840, 41852, 41853, 41867, 41869, 41872, 42609, 42611,

42606, 45243, 45249, 45381, 45386, 46727, 46730, 46756, 45536, 45614, 45595,

45604, 45606, 45607, 45615, 45733, 45596, 45942, 45946, 45956, 45959, 48594,

46978,47393, 47436, 47447, 47412, 47426, 47435, 47394, 47434, 47410, 48317,

48314, 48325, 48327, 48331, 48332, 48340, 48341, 48347, 48349, 48398, 48399,

48407, 48342, 48374, 48378, 48352, 48355, 48359, 48362, 48363, 48367, 48376,

49507, 49656, 49661, 49641, 49681, 49634, 49644, 49654, 49578, 49670, 49672,

49676, 49635, 49659, 49707, 50041, 50045, 50494, 50945, 50932, 50944, 50958,

50960, 50916, 50918, 50929, 51320, 51318, 52295, 52210, 52211, 52221, 52237,

52247, 52249, 52252, 52257, 52258, 52261, 52262, 52298, 52312, 52316, 52750,

52860, 52859, 52861, 52287, 53383, 53385, 53394, 53397, 53399, 53400, 53440,

53441, 53443, 53445, 53446, 53489, 53491, 53493, 53477, 53478, 53482, 53483,

53496, 53497, 53503, 53458, 53460, 53467,53468, 53965, 53968, 53977, 53979,

54025, 54027, 54773, 54787, 54761, 54763, 54771, 54789, 54792, 54813, 54834,

54835, 54836, 54941, 55673, 56100, 56161, 56210 OF 2025

2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

W.M.P. NOS. 247, 248, 254, 255, 258, 259, 261, 264, 273, 274, 276, 277, 281,

294, 295, 304, 305, 280, 348, 789, 793, 934, 916, 961, 963, 967, 969, 970, 985,

2302, 2314, 2315, 2316, 2317, 2430, 2284, 2285, 2303, 2344, 2354, 2355, 2359,

2360, 2361, 2423, 2424, 2432, 2433, 2442, 2445, 2454, 2463, 2293, 2299, 2301,

2306, 2318, 2324, 2333, 2335, 2340, 2341, 2467, 3332, 3334, 4499, 4501, 4987,

5144, 5007, 5011, 5012, 5123, 5124, 5125, 5145, 5149, 5150, 5151, 4975, 4976,

4979, 4980, 4988, 5135, 5137, 4982, 4983, 4984, 4986, 4989, 4990, 4963, 4965,

4970, 4973, 4992, 4993, 4994, 4995, 4998, 4999, 5001, 5002, 5003, 5004, 5006,

4499, 4501, 5963, 5936, 5958, 5962, 5963, 5996, 6001, 6006, 6008, 6009, 6010,

6529, 6530, 6531, 6532, 6533, 6521, 6526, 6522, 6525, 6527, 6528, 6518, 6520,

7939, 7938, 7942, 7944, 7947, 7948, 7964, 7965, 7966, 7968, 7969, 7971, 7972,

7974, 7977, 7975, 7976, 7978, 7980, 7985, 7987, 7989, 8176, 8177, 8178, 7620,

7622, 7924, 7925, 7928, 7929, 8209, 8212, 8213, 8224, 8226, 8784 & 8786/2026

W.P. NO. 12275 OF 2024

1.K.Poongodi

2.C.Hemalatha

3.N.V.Santhi .. Petitioners

- Vs -

1.The State of Tamil Nadu

Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government

School Education Department

Secretariat, Fort St. George

Chennai 600 009.

2.The Director of School Education

Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam

College Road, Chennai 600 006.

3.The Director of Elementary Education

Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam

College Road, Chennai 600 006.

4.The District Educational Officer (Elementary)

Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

5.The Block Development Officer

Kumbakonam Block

Thanjavur District.

6.The Secretary

Finance Department

Government of Tamil Nadu

Secretariat, Fort St. George

Chennai 600 009.

(R-6 suo motu impleaded vide order

Dated 18.9.2025 made in WP 12275/2024).. Respondents

W.P. No.12275 of 2024 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the

records relating to the impugned Government letter issued by the 1

st

respondent

in Letter No.11100/Tho.Ka.(1)/2023-1 School Education Department dated

15.12.2023 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to

continue to pay salary to the petitioners in accordance with fixation of Selection

Grade scale of pay granted for the post of Primary School Headmaster granted

prior to 01.06.2009 with corresponding fixation of pay in the post of Middle

School Headmaster/B.T. Assistant as well as to sanction Selection Grade in the

post of Middle School Headmaster/B.T. Assistant.

For Petitioners:Mr. G.Sankaran, SC for

Mr. S.Nedunchezhiyan in WP

Nos.12275, 12350 , 17118,

18070, 18456, 27165, 27192,

27197, 27202, 27207, 27180,

4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

27189, 27464, 28330, 28334,

28336 & 28339/2024

W.P. Nos.11197, 33541, 35241,

37356, 38116, 40608, 40987,

40993, 41932, 45686, 45707,

45714, 45696, 46011, 47814,

47819, 47822, 47851, 47856,

47886, 47889, of 2025, 647,

653, 7378 & 7382/2026

Mr. P. Murali in WP Nos.29516,

29521, 29524 of 2024, 33090,

45621, 45628, 45628, 45652,

45647, 45658, 45605, 45611,

45618, 45620, 45633, 45639,

45643, 35268, 36104, 36129,

36108, 36123, 36701, 36709,

36803, 36812, 36818, 36881,

36891, 36896, 37403, 37412,

37420, 37424, 37427, 40358,

41687, 41696, 41701, 40407,

41707, 41713, 40671, 40684,

40692, 40681, 40673, 40676,

40680, 42396, 42415, 42417,

42418, 42425, 42421, 42406,

42408, 43173, 43183, 43193,

43186, 43187, 43192, 43194,

43195, 43228, 43224, 43189,

43197, 43198, 43200, 43201,

43203, 43204, 43205, 43206,

43208, 44496, 44500, 44499,

44517, 44504, 44507, 44509,

44511, 44512, 44514, 44516,

44503, 46776, 46786, 46794,

46804, 46805, 46810, 46813,

46821, 46840, 46849, 47863,

47914, 47871, 47877, 47882,

5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

47890, 47899, 47904, 48330,

48339, 48364, 48374, 48386,

48396, 49028, 49042, 49084,

49051, 49058, 49047, 49088,

49036, 49045, 49062 &

49076/2025

WP Nos.212, 250, 260, 221, 223,

220, 226, 231, 232, 234, 243,

268, 738, 812, 751, 757, 761,

784, 787, 789, 795, 796, 797,

798, 800, 805, 811, 748, 2122,

2156, 2161, 2168, 2213, 2216,

2232, 2234, 2167, 2130, 2133,

2134, 2135, 2140, 2143, 2144,

2145, 2149, 2154, 2218, 2226,

7388, 7409, 7411, 7413, 7414,

7417, 7569, 7392, 7395, 7406 &

8115/2026

Mrs. S. Dakshayini Reddy, SC, for

Ms. S.Suneetha in WP

No.14081/2025

Mr. P. Ganesan in WP

Nos.19434, 19481, 40287 &

49783/2025

Mr. R. Saseetharan in WP

Nos.34841, 36548, 36558,

38123, 41926, 44365, 44553,

44846, 44855, 45339, 47210,

49179, 50159, 50198,

50238/2025 & 296 & 2973/2026

Mr. R.Nixon in WP

No.37480/2025

6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Mr. Richardson Wilson in WP

No.47351/2025

Mr. K.Chandra in WP 6981/26

Mr.A.S.Kaizer in WP 7592 &

7603/2026

For Respondents:Mr.P.S.Raman, AG, assisted by

Mrs. Mythreye Chandru, Spl.

G.P. For State of Tamil Nadu

(Finance Dept.) in all the WPs

Mr. R. Neelakandan, AAG,

assisted by Mr. Prabhakar GA,

for State of Tamil Nadu

(Education Dept.) in all the WPs

Mr. T.Ravikumar for AGoT in WP

Nos. W.P. Nos. 35241 & 36548,

36558/2025, 738, 812, 751, 757,

761, 784, 787, 789, 795, 796,

797, 798, 800, 805, 811, 748,

2122, 2156, 2161, 2168, 2213,

2216, 2232, 2234, 2167, 2130,

2133, 2134, 2135, 2140, 2143,

2144, 2145, 2149, 2154, 2218 &

2226/2026

Mr. P.Mano Rajan for AGoT in

WP Nos.14081, 19434, 19481,

36818, 36891, 36896, 37356,

37412, 37424, 38123, 40287,

40358, 41687, 41696, 41701,

40407, 41707, 41713, 40608,

40671, 40684, 40692, 40681,

40673, 40676, 40680, 40987,

40993, 41926, 41932, 42396,

7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

42415, 42417, 42418, 42425,

42421, 42406, 42408, 43173,

43183, 43193, 43186, 43187,

43192, 43194, 43195, 43228,

43224, 43189, 43197, 43198,

43200, 43201, 43203, 43204,

43205, 43206, 43208, 44496,

44500, 44499, 44517, 44504,

44507, 44509, 44511, 44512,

44514, 44516, 44503, 45686,

45707, 45724, 45696, 46011,

46776, 46786, 46794, 46804,

46805, 46810, 46813, 46821,

46840, 46849, 47351, 47814,

47819, 47822, 47851, 47856,

47886, 47889, 47863, 47914,

47871, 47877, 47882, 47890,

47899, 47904, 48330, 48339,

48364, 48374, 48386, 48396,

49028, 49036, 49042, 49084,

49051, 49058, 49047, 49084,

49088, 49045, 49062, 49076 &

49783/2025

Mr.V.Vijayshankar for AGoT in

WP Nos.36104, 36129, 36108,

36123, 36701, 36709, 37356,

37480, 38116, 212, 250, 260,

221, 223, 220, 226, 231, 232,

234, 243 & 268/2026

Mr. ANR.Jaya Prathap for AGoT

in WP Nos.33090, 45621, 45628,

45652, 45647, 45658, 45605,

45611, 45618, 45620, 45633,

45639, 45643, & 33541/2025

Mrs.Vardhini Karthik for AGoT in

8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

WP Nos.11197/2025, 4458, 4469,

4476, 4481, 4482, 4486, 4488,

4490, 4492, 4495, 4500, 4503,

4509, 4607, 4613, 4622, 4626,

3781 & 3788/2026

Mr. S.Prabakaran, GA for RR-1 &

3 to R6 in W.P.Nos. 4458, 4469,

4476, 4481, 4482, 4486, 4488,

4490, 4492, 4495, 4500, 4503,

4509, 4607, 4613, 4622,

4626/2026

Mr. L.Muralikrishna for R-4 in

W.P. Nos.5433 & 5438/2026, for

R-7 in W.P. Nos.5996, 6001,

6006, 6008, 6009 & 6010/2026

and for R-8 in W.P.

No.4029/2026, for R7 in W.P.

Nos. 7388, 7409, 7411, 7413,

7414, 7417, 7569, 7392, 7395,

7406/2026, for R-5 in WP

No.6981/20926

COMMON ORDER

The writ petitions, which were listed on different dates, were heard,

separately, but as the issue involved in all the writ petitions being common,

relating to the impugned order in and by which direction was issued for refixation

of selection grade scales of pay and consequential recovery orders passed, they

are being disposed of by this common order.

9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

2. The order impugned in these writ petitions relates to refixation of the

selection grade scales of pay and the consequential recovery orders passed by

the respondents to recover the erroneous grant of higher selection grade scale of

pay granted to the petitioners, while implementing the recommendations of the

6

th

Pay Commission issued vide G.O. Ms. No.234 and G.O. Ms. No.23, without

notice to the petitioners, which is assailed before this Court through the present

petitions.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above batch of writ petitions

are as under :-

Pursuant to the recommendations made of the 6

th

Central Pay Commission

in respect of Central Government staff members, the same was adopted by the

State of Tamil Nadu leading to the issuance of G.O. Ms. No.234, Finance (Pay Cell)

Dept., dated 1.6.2009, on the basis of the recommendations issued by the Official

Committee on revision of scales of pay and allowances in respect of State

Government employees and Teachers with monetary effect from 01.01.2007.

However, as certain issues were pointed out in the fixation of the pay scales in

the aforesaid G.O. Ms. No.234, the State Government appointed One Man

10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Commission to look into the issues and, thereafter, based on the report

submitted by the One Man Commission, revised pay scales were fixed.

4. In respect of teachers, the Teacher Associations/Pensioners

Associations/Individuals/Retired Teachers sought for clarification on the fixation

of pay in the Selection Grade/Special Grade posts consequent on the revision of

Ordinary Grade scales of pay of the various categories of posts, which led to the

issuance of G.O. Ms. No.23, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 12.01.2011,

which has since been implemented in which the pay scales were modified as under :-

S.No. Name of the Post Present scale of pay

+ Grade Pay

(Rs.)

Modified scale of

pay + Grade Pay

(Rs.)

1B.T. Assistant

(Graduate Teacher)

9300-34800 + 44009300-34800 + 4600

2P.G. Assistant

(Post Graduate Teacher

9300-34800 + 44009300-34800 + 4800

3Primary School Head Master9300-34800 + 43009300-34800 + 4500

4Middle School Head Master9300-34800 + 45009300-34800 + 4700

5Higher Sec. School Head

Master / District Educational

Officer

15600-39100 + 540015600-39100 + 5700

5. The effect of the said pay scale was that it would revise the scales of pay

of the teaching categories aforesaid notionally with effect from 1.1.2006 with

monetary benefit from 1.1.2011.

11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

6. Inspite of the above modification in pay scales, since there subsisted a

discrepancy in the grade pay between P.G. Assistant, who was provided the pay

scale and grade pay of Rs.9300-34800 + GP 4800 and High School Head Master,

who was provided with pay scale and grade pay of Rs.9300-34800 + GP 4600,

G.O. Ms. No.58 dated 25.2.2011 was issued fixing the Grade Pay of High School

Head Master at Rs.4800 in line with the grade pay fixed for P.G. Assistant with

notional fixation on 1.1.2006 and monetary benefit from 1.1.2011.

7. Thereafter, once again representation was made by the various teacher

associations seeking clarification with regard to fixation of pay in Selection

Grade/Special Grade posts consequent to the revision of ordinary grade scales of

pay with regard to the categories afore-stated and considering the first and second level

promotional posts of the teachers, Letter No.14483/CMPC/2011-1 dated 05.01.2012 came to be

issued in which the selection grade/special grade scales of pay as indicated in Annexure-I therein

was provided subject to the conditions stipulated in para-4 (i) of the Government letter in Letter

No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-2, Finance Department dated 8.11.2010 and the revised selection

grade/special grade scales of pay of teachers consequent on the revision of their Ordinary Grade

scales of pay was revised as under :-

S.No.Name of the PostOrdinary Grade

Scale of Pay +

Grade Pay

Selection Grade

scale of pay +

Grade Pay

Special Grade

Scale of pay +

Grade Pay

12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

(Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.)

1 B.T. Assistant

(Graduate Teacher)

9300-34800 +

4600

9300-34800 +

4800 *

15600-39100 +

5700

2 P.G. Assistant

(Post Graduate

Teacher

9300-34800 +

4800

15600-39100 +

5700

15600-39100 +

6600

3 Primary School Head

Master

9300-34800 +

4500

15600-39100 +

5400

15600-39100 +

5700

4 Middle School Head

Master

9300-34800 +

4700

15600-39100 +

5700

15600-39100 +

6600

5 Higher Sec. School

Head Master /

District Educational

Officer

9300-34800 +

4800

15600-39100 +

5700

15600-39100 +

6600

(* Restricted to the first level promotion post, viz., Headmaster, High School)

8. In the aforesaid letter, there was a further stipulation that the above

Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay would be applicable only in respect

of teachers, who were awarded selection grade/special grade prior to 1.1.2006

and teachers who have opted for the revised scale of pay on a subsequent date

between 1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009, i.e., from the date of their award of Selection

Grade/Special Grade. Further, the above selection grade/special grade scales of

pay was to take notional effect from 1.1.2006 or from the date of exercising

revised option as the case may be and with monetary benefit from 1.1.2011.

9. However, for more than a decade from the date of grant of the said

monetary benefit there was no action and only when certain clarifications were

13 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

sought for from the Government based on certain audit queries vide

communication of the Administrative Officer dated 21.11.2023, Letter No.11100

dated 15.12.2023 came to be issued, wherein it was clarified as under :-

“

மேற்காண்

ஆ

ணைகளின்படி

தொ

டக்கக்

க

ல்வித்

து

றையில்

உ

ள்ள

தொ

டக்கப்பள்ளித்

த

லைமையாசிரியர்கள்

ப

ணிமூப்புத்

த

ன்மையால்

ப

ட்டதாரி

/ நடு

நிலைப்

ப

ள்ளித்

த

லைமையாசிரியராக

ப

தவி

உ

யர்வு

பெ

ற

இ

யலாதவர்களுக்கு

தே

ர்வுநிலை

சி

றப்புநிலையில்

த

ர

ஊதி

யம்

மு

றையே

ரூ.15600-39100 ரூ.15600-

39100.த.ஊ 5700 த.ஊ. 5400 ம

ற்றும்

ஊதி

யம்

நி

ர்ணயம்

செ

ய்யப்பட்டு

, பி

ன்னர்

பி.ஏ.பி.எ

ஸ்சி

.பிலி

ட்

இ

ளங்கலை

ப

ட்டத்துடன்

பி.எ

ட்

. ப

ட்டய

க

ல்வித்

த

குதியும்

பெ

ற்று

ப

ட்டதாரி

/ நடு

நிலைப்

ப

ள்ளித்

த

லைமையாசிரியராக

ப

தவி

உ

யர்வு

பெ

ற்றுள்ளதால்

, அ

ட்டவணையில்

தெ

ரிவித்தவாறு

அ.க.எ

ண்

.63305/ஊ.பி.20101. நி

தித்

து

றை

, நா

ள்

சி

றப்புநிலையில்

மு

றையே

08.11.2010-இ

ன்

ப

த்தி

4(i)-

இ

ன்படி

தே

ர்வுநிலை

அ

ப்பணியிடத்தின்

மு

தல்

ம

ற்றும்

இ

ரண்டாம்

நி

லை

ப

தவி

உ

யர்வு

ப

ணியிடங்களின்

சா

தாரண

நி

லை

ஊதி

ய

விகி

தத்திற்கு

ம

ட்டுப்படுத்தப்பட்டு

நி

ர்ணயம்

செ

ய்யப்பட

வே

ண்டும்

எ

ன

த

ங்களுக்கு

தெ

ரிவித்துக்

கொ

ள்ளப்

ப

ணிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளேன்

.”

Free Hand Translation :

14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

“As per the above orders, the Primary School Principals in

the Primary Education Department who are unable to get

promotion as Graduate/Middle School Principals due to

seniority will be given the grade pay of Rs. 5400 for the

selection grade/special grade pay of Rs. 15600-39100 + GP

5400 and 15600-39100 + GP 5700 and they later qualified

themselves in B.A. B.Sc. B.Litt., B.Ed. with Bachelor's degree

and obtained the promotion, as Graduate Teacher/Middle

School Head Master, as shown in the Schedule to the Letter

No.63305/UP/2010-1, Finance Dept., dated 8.11.2010, in para

4 (i), selection grade/special grade level shall be limited to the

normal pay scale of the first and second promotion posts.”

10. Based on the aforesaid clarification issued by the Government in

respect of the audit query raised, the present recovery orders have come to be

passed in respect of the petitioners herein by the respective district authority

calling upon the petitioners to pay the amount quantified as erroneous excess

payment made on the ground of grant of selection grade scale of pay, which is

put in issue in the present writ petitions.

11. In the backdrop of the aforestated factual scenario relating to the

grant of selection grade/special grade scales of pay, the brief facts of the case of

the petitioners touches on the fact that they were appointed as Secondary Grade

15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Teachers (for short ‘SGT’) and on completion of 10 years of service, the

petitioners were granted the selection grade scale of pay in the post of SGT, as is

in vogue in the earlier pay commission scale and, thereafter, the petitioners were

made Primary School Headmaster (for short ‘HM-PS’), which carried the very

same scale of pay as that of SGT and, therefore, after completion of another 10

years of service from the date of their grant of selection grade in the post of SGT,

the petitioners were granted selection grade, once again in the post of HM-PS.

Thereafter, the petitioners were promoted as Headmaster Middle School (for

short ‘HM-MS’) and their pay was fixed on the basis of the pay, which they were

drawing in the post of HM-PS. Thereafter, consequent to certain audit queries

with regard to fixation of the pay of the petitioners in the selection grade scale of

HM-PS, either for the purpose of computing the terminal benefits payable to

them at the time of retirement or during the routine audit where the pay fixation

between the senior and junior was found to have been not done properly, the

impugned Government Letter had come to be issued by the Education

Department as to the manner in which the selection grade scale of pay ought to

have been fixed and based on the said impugned Government Letter, recovery

orders have come to be passed against the respective petitioners calling upon

them to deposit the alleged excess portion of the pay received by them due to

16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

wrong fixation of pay and aggrieved by the said impugned order as also the

consequential recovery order, the present batch of writ petitions have come to

be filed.

12. Learned senior counsel and the other learned counsel appearing for

the respective petitioners submitted that the impugned letter dated 15.12.2023,

which has been issued after more than a decade and a half from the date of grant

of selection grade scale of pay to the petitioners, had taken away the benefit

which was given to HM-PS vide the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012 by

introducing a new scale of pay by directing refixation in the lower scale of pay

upon the subsequent promotion of the petitioners as HM-MS, most of whom

have since retired from service, is grossly erroneous and against the principles of

natural justice and the delay in issuing the said communication is fatal to the

impugned order.

13. It is the further submission of the learned senior counsel that it is

settled principle that an amendment or change, more particularly with reference

to the scales of pay cannot be given retrospective effect as it cannot take away a

right, which was vested and acquired by the Government servants. Reliance is

17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Sree Sankaracharya University of

Sanskrit & Ors. – Vs – Dr.Manu & Anr. (2023 SCC OnLine SC 640), more

particularly para-56, wherein the Supreme Court has held that any clarification,

which is given subsequently through which a vested and acquired right is sought

to be taken away is only an amendment and the clarification/amendment so

introduced cannot have retrospective operation so as to take away the benefits

enjoyed by the individuals and the benefits already granted cannot be

withdrawn.

14. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that a benefit, which

was given vide the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012, that too on the basis of

the recommendations made on the basis of the Pay Commission

recommendations cannot be withdrawn by the impugned Government Letter

dated 15.12.2023. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the

benefit was granted vide the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012 by the Finance

Department, based on the Pay Commission’s recommendations cannot be

unilaterally and without the concurrence of the Finance Department, be taken

away by the Education Department by reworking the scales of pay through

18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

issuance of the impugned letter dated 15.12.2023, which is impermissible and

perverse.

15. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that it is the settled

legal position that the benefit, which was granted vide an earlier Government

letter cannot be taken away by a subsequent Government letter and the

withdrawal of the earlier Government Letter cannot non-suit the petitioners, who

are entitled to the benefits as per the Government Order, that was existing then.

In the present case, the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012 was in force on the

date when the benefit was given to the petitioners and the said letter having not

been rescinded, the present Government Letter dated 15.12.2023 cannot take

away a right, which was given to the petitioners by a previous Government

Letter, moreso when the said letter dated 5.1.2012 was issued by a different

department, viz., Finance Department, it cannot be set at naught by the School

Education Department.

16. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that FR 22-B clearly

stipulates that where a Government servant is promoted or appointed to a

higher post after 1.1.2006 and also in cases where a Government servant has

19 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

moved to Selection Grade or Special Grade after 1.1.2006 and opted for revised

scale of pay on a subsequent date after 1.1.2006 in whose cases their Selection

Grade or Special Grade of the lower post carries identical or higher pay band and

or grade pay, the Government servant shall be allowed to continue in the same

identical or higher pay band and grade pay applicable to the Selection Grade or

Special Grade of the lower post, as per the clarifications issued in Government

Letter No.45113/Finance (PC) Dept., dated 17.08.2009 with one increment

benefit either from the date of promotion or from the date of accrual of next

increment in the lower post based on the option exercised by the Government

Servant.

17. In the light of FR 22-B, it is the submission of the learned counsel that

when FR 22-B in clear and in unambiguous term has spelt out the manner in

which the scale of pay of a Government Servant has to be fixed upon the

movement of the Government servant to Selection Grade/Special Grade scale of

pay prior to his/her promotion, the benefit granted by the said rule, which has

been confirmed vide the Government Letter dated 17.08.2009, which has since

amended FR 22-B, the said benefit granted cannot be taken away by a

Government Letter issued subsequently based on directions issued in an earlier

20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Government Letter, which was very well available before the respondents, when

the benefit was granted vide the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012. Therefore,

the present order directing refixation and consequential recovery is grossly

erroneous and perverse.

18. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the pay of the

petitioners were fixed by the pay fixing authority for moving the petitioners to

selection grade scale of pay of Rs.15600-391000 + GP 5400 of HM-PS, who were,

thereafter, further promoted to the post of HM-MS upon their obtainment of

B.Ed. qualification and to the post of B.T. Assistant with one increment benefit.

Therefore, the benefit granted in the selection grade scale of pay in the post of

HM-PS cannot be brought down on the basis of the promotion of the petitioners

to the post of HM-MS.

19. It is the submission of the learned counsel that the pay fixation of the

petitioners is as per the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012 and applying FR 22-B

and no excess pay was paid to the petitioners in violation of any Rule or

Government Order, which was in force at the relevant point of time and,

therefore there cannot be any recovery. Further, it is the submission of the

21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

learned counsel that what was already received by the petitioner as scale of pay

cannot be brought down in a promoted post, which is precisely what FR 22-B (11)

(1) spells out which safeguards the interests of the Government Servants who

were receiving higher scale of pay even prior to promotion, though the

promotion post carried a scale of pay, which was already reached by the

Government Servant in the lower post. Therefore, when FR 22-B has been

properly applied to the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012 and the petitioners

have been fixed their scale of pay upon moving to the Selection Grade post and

also on their further promotion to the promotional post of HM-MS, through the

impugned Government Letter dated 15.12.2023, the respondents cannot alter

the scale of pay and further direct recovery or refixation of pay, which has

already been received by the petitioners, moreso, when FR 22-B does not

contemplate such degradation of already conferred benefit.

20. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the

Government, in its wisdom had issued the letter dated 5.1.2012 by deciding the

next hierarchy for the post of HM-PS is B.T. Assistant and HM-MS for which the

necessary qualification is a degree in B.Ed., while for the post of HM-PS, degree is

not required and only Diploma in Teacher Education is sufficient. It is the further

22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

submission of the learned counsel that the post of B.T. Assistant and HM-MS are

higher post, which requires additional qualifications and cannot be given to HM-

PS merely on the basis of seniority and in this regard Rule 36 of the State and

Subordinate Service Rules is pressed into service wherein it is clearly spelt that

promotion means appointment given on seniority.

21. It is therefore the submission of the learned counsel that only realising

the position of HM-PS vis-a-vis B.T. Assistant and HM-MS, the Government, more

particularly with reference to the Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay,

while issuing the Letter dated 5.1.2012 has not restricted the Selection Grade

Scale of Pay of HM-PS to the level of B.T. Assistant and HM-MS, which would be

evident from the Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay that has been

provided for, for HM-PS.

22. It is further submission of the learned counsel that restriction applies

only to the post of B.T. Assistant working in High School, which finds at S. No.1 of

Annexure I attached to the Government letter dated 8.11.2010 and it is not

applicable to the post of HM-PS, which finds place at S. No.3, as the Government,

in its wisdom, had not prescribed any such restriction and Government has

23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

granted the benefit of S. No.15 of Annexure I of Government Letter dated

8.11.2010 to persons holding the post of HM-PS, in the said scale of pay like the

petitioners. In this regard, it is highlighted by the learned counsel that the said

benefit has been given to all HM-PS, who moved to Selection Grade prior to

1.1.2006 as well as to those who moved to Selection Grade for the period

between 01.01.2006 and 31.5.2009 and it has not been extended any further to

other persons, which clearly shows the intent of issuing the said orders on

5.1.2012, which is only to safeguard the interests of persons like the petitioners.

23. It is therefore submitted by the learned counsel that the said benefit is

given from 1.1.2006 or from the date of exercise of option notionally with

monetary benefit from 1.1.2011 and all the petitioners herein moved to Selection

Grade in the post of HM-PS in the above two spells and they were granted the

Selection Grade Scale of Pay in the Pay Band Rs.15600 – 39100 + GP 5400 on the

basis of the Government Letter dated 5.1.2012. Further, for more than a decade

and a half, the petitioners have been allowed to draw their pay and that their pay

has also been fixed in the revised scale of pay of Rs.15600-39100 + GP 5400 from

1.1.2006 or from the date of option notionally and, therefore, the benefit, which

24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

has been extended to them cannot be recovered through the impugned

Government Letter.

24. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that even the

proceedings of the Accountant General dated 16.4.2019 with reference to W.P.

No.2973/2026, wherein the fixation of Grade Pay of HM-PS at Rs.5400/- has been

held to be correct, yet the retirement benefits of the petitioners have not been

paid to the petitioners in full citing the impugned Government Letter dated

15.12.2023 by giving it retrospective application, which is grossly perverse, as the

approval of the Accountant General makes it clear that the pay fixation given to

the petitioners is correct as per the then existing Government Letter dated

5.1.2012 and no excess payment has been made to the petitioners.

25. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the

respondents cannot claim recovery based on the consent expressed by the

petitioners, as the consent was based on pressure and duress, as the livelihood of

the petitioners depends on the pension being released to them monthly as they

are not in equal bargaining power against the mighty State and are mere retired

government employees, who cannot face the wrath of the State. Therefore, the

25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

consent, if at all expressed by the petitioners, cannot be put against them, as has

been held in a catena of decisions by the Courts.

26. In support of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the

petitioners placed reliance on the following decisions, in addition to the decisions

referred above :-

1)State of Punjab – Vs – Rafiq Masih (2015 (4) SCC 334;

2)Jagdish Prasad – Vs – State of Bihar & Ors. (2024 SCC

OnLine SC 1909;

3)Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit & Ors. – Vs – Dr.

Manu & Anr. (2023 SCC OnLine SC 640);

4)P.Subramani – Vs – Govt. of Tamil Nadu & Anr. (2001 (3)

LW 385);

5)D.Balasubramaniam & Ors. – Vs – The Govt. of Tamil Nadu

& Ors. (1991 (2) LW 76); and

6)P.Subramanian – Vs – Govt. of Tamil Nadu & Ors. (2010 (3)

MLJ 934)

27. Per contra, learned Advocate General appearing for the State

submitted that the grant of the benefit of selection grade is only where there is

no opportunity for promotion. However, in the case of the petitioners, who were

HM-PS on the date when selection grade scale of pay was granted, there was

next avenue of promotion to the post of HM-MS/B.T. Assistants, if they fulfill

26 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

certain qualifications. The benefit of selection grade is only where there are no

promotional avenues, but in the case of the petitioners, they were having

promotional avenues and they have also been promoted. Therefore, the

provision of selection grade is only for the purpose of motivating persons, who do

not have promotional avenue by providing extra pay so that they would not feel

the effect of stagnation in service.

28. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that have,

since the grant of selection grade, opted for promotion to the higher scale and

have since been promoted as B.T. Assistants/HM-MS. If the pay scale, as

provided in the selection grade is made available to them, it would lead to an

anomalous situation where one set of B.T. Assistants from one stream would be

drawing a higher scale of pay than the B.T. Assistants, from another stream,

which would be violative of right to equality and also equal pay for equal work.

29. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that the

concept of Selection Grade and Special Grade was formally restored vide G.O.

Ms. No.309, finance (PC) Department dated 1.4.1990 with retrospective effect

from 1.6.1988 and this order to reintroduce the benefit of next pay scales for

27 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

employees who stagnated in the same post for 10 and 20 years and this

restoration meant that HM-PS could have their pay moved to a higher scale, but

the said Government Order introduced a fundamental ‘restrictive principle.

30. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that any

inadvertent error committed by the respondents under a mistaken application of

the provisions of the Government Order/Letter cannot be taken aid of by the

petitioners to claim that no recovery can be made when as per the provisions of

the Pay Commission recommendations and the Government Orders issued, when

the petitioners are not entitled for the pay, the bona fide wrong fixation cannot

be the basis to refuse order of recovery. To substantiate the aforesaid

contention, learned Advocate General placed reliance on the decision of the Apex

Court in Chandi Prasad Uniyal & Ors. – Vs – State of Uttarakhand & Ors. (C.A.

No.5899/2021 – Dated 17.08.2012), wherein the Apex Court, in clear terms had

laid down that merely because it is established that there was no

misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the recipients to receive excess pay,

the amount paid could not be recovered. It is therefore the submission of the

learned Advocate General that everything boils down to the facts of the

particular case and where the mistake is bona fide and where the entitlement of

28 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

the petitioners are not established, but it runs to the contra, necessarily, the

recovery ordered cannot be held to be perverse as the petitioners are not

entitled to the higher pay, even in the absence of any fraud or misrepresentation.

31. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that the

delay in making the recovery cannot be put against the State, as the whole error

that had crept it had come out as a result of certain audit queries and during

processing of certain pension papers by the Accountant General office and on

pointing out the error in the application of the Government Order, the impugned

Government Letter had come to be issued to correct the said error and the said

delay is not attributable to any authority or for that matter the State, but it is

purely an error unconnected with the administrative activity, but on an

erroneous application of the provision of the Government Orders and, therefore,

the said delay cannot be put against the respondents, moreso, when public

money is involved, which has been paid to the petitioners in the form of higher

remuneration to which they are legally not entitled to.

32. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that in

certain cases, the petitioners have been paid higher pay under the analogy of

29 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

junior getting more pay than the senior. However, the said grant itself is

erroneous for the reason that it could be applied only when the junior and senior

are in the same cadre. However, when the junior and senior are in two different

cadres, the plea of junior getting more pay than the senior would not be

applicable so as to give the benefit of higher pay to the senior, as the pay is

governed cadre-based and not merely on the basis of date of entry into service,

as each cadre is governed by a particular pay scale. Therefore, any amount

granted on the mistaken application of junior getting more pay than the senior

could very well be recovered from the respective persons.

33. It is the further submission of the learned Advocate General that at the

end of the day, the entitlement of the petitioners have to be tested against the

interest of the public, as the exchequer, as the custodian of the public funds, is

entrusted with the task of safeguarding the interests of the public and see to it

that the public money is properly utilised and, therefore, when there is no fraud

or collision and the act is due to inadvertence at the hands of the authorities and

when the petitioners are not entitled to the fixation of pay as aforesaid, then it is

well within the powers of the respondents to seek for recovery of the said sums,

which have been paid in excess to the petitioners to which they are not entitled

30 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

and, therefore, the impugned order cannot be said to be erroneous and

recoveries could very well be made, as has been held in a catena of decisions. It

is also placed before this Court by the learned Advocate General that

approximately 4252 teachers have been granted erroneous pay fixation resulting

in an estimated financial burden of Rs.1,000 Crore to the exchequer.

34. The respective learned senior panel counsel and learned panel counsel

appearing for the Accountant General adopted the submissions advanced by the

learned Advocate General and submitted that the erroneous fixation of pay has

to be refixed based on the audit query, which alone would prevent the

anomalous situation.

35. In support of the aforesaid submissions, on behalf of the respondents

reliance was placed on the following decisions :-

i)Chandi Prasad Uniyal & Ors. – Vs – State of Uttrakhand &

Ors. (2012 (8) SCC 417);

ii)Union of India & Ors. – Vs – Phanwar Lal Mundan (2013

(12) SCC 433);

iii)High Court of Punjab & Haryana & Ors. – VS – Jagdev Singh

(2016 (14) SCC 267);

iv)Sasikala Devi P – Vs – State of Kerala & Anr. (2023 SCC

OnLine SC 513); and

31 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

v)Godrej Properties Ltd. – Vs – Accountant General (A&E) &

Ors. (W.P. 29304, 29373 & 29374/2019 – Madras High

Court)

36. This Court gave its careful consideration to the erudite submissions

advanced by the learned senior counsel and other learned counsel appearing on

either side and also perused the relevant Government Orders, the Government

Letters, the Pay Commission Recommendations and the letters through which the

relevant pay scales were fixed and also the decisions relied upon on behalf of the

respective parties.

37. The present batch of cases centres around four different types of

teachers, who were initially appointed as SGT and lates as HM-PS and, thereafter,

they have been promoted. The writ petitions can be conveniently grouped into

four categories, as under :-

i)Petitioners who are still in service;

ii)Petitioners, who have retired and from whom

recoveries have already been effected;

iii)Petitioners, who have retired and from whom

recoveries are yet to be made; and

32 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

iv)Petitioners against whom only proposals for recovery

has been issued and against which further

proceedings has been stayed.

38. The case revolves around the members employed as teaching faculty

under the Education Department and more especially it relates to therefixation of

pay in the Selection Grade Scale that has been granted to them in post of HM-PS

prior to their being promoted as B.T. Assistant/HM-MS upon they getting

themselves qualified for such promotion by obtaining the relevant degrees.

39. Therefore, it becomes imperative for this Court to look at the structure

of the posts in the School Education Department along with the promotional

aspects, which would throw light on the manner in which promotions are granted

to the teachers.

40. The posts of HM-MS, Graduate Teachers (B.T. Assistants), HM-PS and

Secondary Grade Teacher are governed by the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu

Elementary Education Subordinate Service. Rule 2 relates to appointment to the

33 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

various classes and categories and the appointment with regard to the aforesaid

posts, as found in Rule 2 are as hereunder :-

Class Category Method of Appointment

I1.Block Educational Officer(i)By direct recruitment through Teachers

Recruitment Board

(ii)By promotion from category 2 of class 1

of the service:

Provided that fifty percent of the

substantive vacancies shall be filled by

direct recruitment.

2.Headmaster/Headmistress

of Middle School

(i)

(ii)

By promotion from class II and category 1

of class III of the service in combined

seniority.

If no qualified and suitable candidate is

available for appointment by the method

specified in item (i) above, the vacancy

shall be filled by direct recruitment.

II1.Graduate Teacher (Tamil)(i)

(ii)

(iii)

By promotion from eligible person in

category 1 of class III of the service. If no

eligible person is available for promotion

in category 1 of class III of the service, the

vacancy shall be filled up by promotion

from eligible person in category 2 of class

III

(or)

By transfer of qualified personnel from

any other unit

(or)

If no qualified and suitable candidate is

available for appointment by any of the

methods specified in item (i) and (ii)

above, then by direct recruitment

2.Graduate Teacher

(Other than Tamil)

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

By promotion from eligible person in

category 1 of class III of the service. If no

eligible person is available for promotion

in category 1 of class III of the service, the

vacancy shall be filled up by promotion

from eligible person in category 2 of class

III

(or)

By transfer of qualified personnel from

any other unit

(or)

If no qualified and suitable candidate is

34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

available for appointment by any of the

methods specified in item (i) and (ii)

above, then by direct recruitment

3.Graduate Teacher (Subjects)(i)By promotion from eligible person in

category 1 of class III of the service. If no

eligible person is available for promotion

in category 1 of class III of the service, the

vacancy shall be filled up by promotion

from eligible person in category 2 of class

III

(or)

(ii)By transfer of qualified personnel from

any other unit

(or)

(iii)If no qualified and suitable candidate is

available for appointment by any of the

methods specified in item (i) and (ii)

above, then by direct recruitment

III1.Headmaster/Headmistress

of Primary Schools

By promotion from category 2 of Class III

2.Secondary Grade Teacher By direct recruitment

IV Physical Education Teacher By direct recruitment

V Pre-Vocational Instructor By direct recruitment

41. From the above, it is amply evident that for promotion to the post of

HM-MS, which is in Class I of Category 2, the same is to be filled up by promotion

from Class II, viz., Graduate Teacher and Category 1 of Class III, viz., HM-PS in

combined seniority and insofar as Graduate Assistant (which is B.T. Assistant

otherwise said), which is in Class II of category 1, 2 and 3, it is to be filled up by

way of promotion of persons from Category I of Class III, viz., HM-PS and if no

eligible person is available, then it is to be filled up by promotion from persons in

Category (2) of Class III, viz., Secondary Grade Teacher. In respect of HM-PS, it is

35 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

to be filled up by way of promotion from Category (2) of Class III, viz., Secondary

Grade Teacher.

42. That said with regard to the hierarchy of the posts and the

promotional avenues open for the various categories of teachers, the

appointment of the teachers, who are governed by the present cases, dates back

to the late 1980’s and who were then appointed as SGT. Almost all the

petitioners, who were SGT, were the recipient of Selection Grade scale of pay

upon completion of 10 years of service. The pay scale as was in vogue, when

Selection Grade pay was given to the petitioners of SGT, who had completed 10

years, was guided by the 5

th

Pay Commission recommendations wherein the

petitioners were in the pay scale of Rs.5300-150-8300. Thereafter, the

petitioners were promoted from the post of SGT in Class III Category 2 to the post

of HM-PS, which is in Category 1 of the very same Class III. It is to be pointed out

that both the post of HM-PS and SGT carries the same scale of pay, which is not

disputed by the parties, though the method of appointment as is spelt in the

Special Rules shows the movement from SGT to HM-PS as promotion from

Category 2 of Class III.

36 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

43. It is the settled position of law that for the purpose of considering a

movement as promotion, the said movement should be associated with higher

duties and responsibilities and should carry a higher scale of pay. However, in

the case of movement from SGT to HM-PS, the movement, though is shown as

promotion in the Special Rules, however, the scale of pay being one and the same

for HM-PS and SGT, though HM-PS carried some additional duties and

responsibilities, the said movement of SGT to HM-PS cannot in stricto sensu be

characterised as promotion, but would have to be construed as a change in

nomenclature of the post on the basis of seniority.

44. Only in that backdrop, when Selection Grade was given in the post of

SGT, thereafter, upon movement of the petitioners to the post of HM-PS, after

completion of 10 years from the time they received the selection grade scale of

pay in the post of SGT, further selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-PS

was given to them.

45. It is a well known fact that Selection Grade scale of pay is granted to a

Government servant on putting in 10 years of service when no promotion is

granted to the said employee on account of the employee stagnating in the said

37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

post for a period of 10 years. Thereafter, on completion of further period of 10

years, if no promotion is granted to the said Government servant, the

Government servant is entitled to be moved to the Special Grade scale of pay.

However, if promotion is granted to a Government servant during the 10 year

period, the Government servant would not be entitled to the special pay either

through selection grade or special grade, as the case may be.

46. It is to be pointed out even at the first instance that only due to an

employee stagnating in a post without promotion a period exceeding 10 years,

selection grade scale of pay is given. The grant of selection grade scale of pay

cannot be clubbed with the promotional avenue available to an employee to

climb up the ladder in the organisational hierarchy. Further, grant of selection

grade would also not affect the promotion of an employee at a later point of time

beyond 10 years in case the employee had received the selection grade scale of

pay. Therefore, it could safely be construed that a stagnated employee is

assured a benefit of increase in scale of pay so that the employee gets motivated

to work better even if no promotion has been given to the said employee for a

period of 10 years. Therefore, merely because promotional avenue exists would

not bar an employee from receiving selection grade/special grade scale of pay

38 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

upon completion of 10/20 years of service, if no promotion has been given to an

employee for a continuous period of 10 years of service.

47. In the case of the petitioners, as stated above, the petitioners, having

not been granted any promotion, were given the selection grade pay upon

completion of 10 years of service in the post of SGT and, thereafter, they were

moved to the post of HM-PS. However, after a period of 10 years from the date

on which they were granted selection grade scale of pay in the post of SGT, they

were granted selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-PS, which could only

mean that the movement of the petitioners from SGT to HM-PS cannot be

characterised as promotion, which is further strengthened by the fact that the

scale of pay of SGT and HM-PS are one and the same, which fact is not in dispute

and is also borne out by records.

48. Upon movement of the petitioners to the post of HM-PS somewhere in

the year 2006 and grant of selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-PS in

the year 2008, subsequently, the petitioners were promoted to the post of HM-

MS. The appointment to the post of HM-MS is by promotion from Class II and

Category 1 of Class III, viz., from the post of Graduate Teachers and HM-PS.

39 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

50. The movement of the petitioners from the post of HM-PS to the post

of HM-MS was in the fag end of 2008, but their movement to the selection grade

scale of pay was in the post of HM-PS which was in the earlier part of 2008, much

before their promotion to the post of HM-MS. The recommendations of the 6

th

Pay Commission was put in motion by issuance of G.O. Ms. No.234 Finance (Pay

Cell) Dept., dated 01.06.2009, with certain modifications, and the new scales of

pay were notified for implementation in which the scale of pay of the

Government servants were notionally fixed on 1.1.2006, but entitlement of

monetary benefits was from 1.1.2007. In the above scenario, the various

Government Orders in G.O. Ms. No.23, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated

12.01.2011 and G.O. Ms. No.58 dated 25.2.2011 with regard to fixation of pay of

the teachers had come to be issued.

51. The manner in which the teachers would move to the selection

grade/special grade scales of pay on completion of 10/20 years of service is

prescribed under G.O. Ms. No.23 and Letter No.14483/CMPC/2011-1 dated

5.1.2012, which has already been extracted supra. From a careful perusal of both

the aforesaid Government Order and the Government Letter, it is evident that

40 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

what was left out in G.O. Ms. No.23, was, in fact, fixed in Letter No.14483,

wherein the Ordinary Grade, Selection Grade and Special Grade scales of pay

along with the applicable Grade Pay were spelt out.

52. In Letter No.14483, more particularly in para-4, the promotional

avenues for B.T. Assistant, High School Headmaster and P.G. Assistant have been

highlighted along with the respective scales of pay and for better clarity the same

is quoted hereunder :-

“4. …….. the first level and second level promotion post for

the post of B.T. Assistant (Rs.9300—34800 + Grade Pay

Rs.4600) is Head Master High School (Rs.9300—34800 + Grade

Pay Rs.4800) and Head Master Higher Secondary School (if

qualified) / District Educational Officer (Rs.15600—39100 +

Grade Pay Rs.5700), for Head Master High School (Rs.9300—

34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4800) is P.G. Assistant (Rs.9300—34800

+ Grade Pay Rs.4800) / Head Master Higher Secondary School

(if qualified) / District Educational Officer (Rs.15600—39100 +

Grade Pay of Rs.5700). In respect of P.G. Assistant (Rs.9300—

34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4800) first and second level promotion

posts are Head Master Higher Secondary School (Rs.15600—

39100 + Grade Pay Rs.5700) and Chief Educational Officer

(Rs.15600—39100 + Grade Pay of Rs.6600).”

41 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

53. As could be evidenced from the above, while the first level and second

level promotion for B.T. Assistant is Headmaster High School and Headmaster

Higher Secondary School (if qualified)/District Educational Officer, for

Headmaster High School it is P.G. Assistant/Headmaster Higher Secondary School

(if qualified)/District Educational Officer. In respect of P.G. Assistant the first and

second level promotion posts are Headmaster Higher Secondary School and Chief

Educational Officer.

54. From the above, it could be safely concluded that while B.T. Assistant

and HM-HS are analogous posts, equally, P.G. Assistant and Headmaster Higher

Secondary School are analogous posts, which would also be evident from the

scales of pay the posts carry as is portrayed in para-4 quoted above. Therefore,

by no means, a movement from B.T. Assistant to the post of HM-MS or P.G.

Assistant to the post of Headmaster Higher Secondary School could be termed to

be a promotion as there is no difference in the scales of pay. Carrying of equal

scales pay by both the posts would reveal the equality of the said posts.

Therefore, by no means a movement from one post to the other carrying equal

scales of pay could be said to be a promotion.

42 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

55. Only in that backdrop, the movement of SGT to HM-PS, as already

stated above, cannot be said to be promotion, which alone had led to the

payment of selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-PS to the petitioners.

56. The selection grade scale of pay has been provided to the petitioners

on the basis of Letter No.14483, dated 5.1.2012, however, the entire scenario as

evidenced in the present case has cropped up based on the last portion of para-4

of the aforesaid letter, wherein, it has been provided thus :-

“4. ........ The Primary School Head Masters (Rs.9300—

34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4500) and Middle School Head Masters

(Rs.9300—34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4700) those who have

acquired B.A./ B.Sc./ B Lit. plus B.Ed. qualification alone are

eligible for promotion as B.T. Assistant in Middle School and

Head Master Middle School by virtue of their seniority.

Considering the first and second level promotional posts of the

Teachers, they are entitled for the revised Selection Grade /

Special Grade scales of pay as indicated in Annexure—I subject

to the conditions stipulated in para—4(i) of the Government

letter third cited.”

57. It has been held in Letter No.14483, that the selection grade/special

grade scale of pay that is to be awarded is to be on the basis of the conditions

stipulated in para-4 of the Government letter No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-5, Finance

43 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Department, dated 30.11.2010. Therefore, for appreciating the same, the

relevant Government Letter No.63305 requires to be adverted to, which runs as

under :-

4) The above issue has been examined by Government in

detail in the light of the orders issued in para-4 of Government

Order second cited and the consequential revision made to the

various categories in the Ordinary Grade scales of pay based

on the One Man Commission recommendations and

subsequent Government Orders. Accordingly, I am directed to

issue the following guidelines for fixation of pay in the revised

Selection Grade/Special Grade posts:

i) The revised Selection Grade / Special Grade scales of pay

in the case of employees awarded Selection Grade / Special

Grade prior to 1-1-2006 and in whose cases the Ordinary

Grade scales of pay have been revised based on the

recommendations of One Man Commission/further order of

Government thereon shall be fixed as per the scales of pay

indicated in the Annexure I to this letter following the same

methodology of fixation of pay in the Selection Grade / Special

Grade scales of pay of employees as was done in pre-2006

scales of pay as indicated in Appendix-ll of G.O.Ms. No, 162,

Finance (PC) Department, dated: 13-4-98 subject to the same

condition stipulated therein that if the revised Selection

Grade/Special Grade scales of pay indicated in the Annexure-1

happens to be higher than the first level/second level

promotion posts, then in such cases only the revised Selection

44 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Grade/Special Grade scales of pay should be restricted to the

level of their first level and second level promotional posts

respectively.

ii) The above revised Selection Grade / Special Grade scales

of pay indicated in the Annexure-I to this letter shall be

confined only to the employees who were awarded Selection

Grade/Special Grade prior to 1-1-2006 and in the case of

employees who have exercised their option to come over to

the revised scales of pay on the date of their award of

Selection Grade / Special Grade between 1-1-2006 and 31-5-

2009, (prior to the issue of G.O. Ms. No. 234, Finance (Pay Cell)

Department, dated: 1-6-2009.)

58. Sub-clause (i) of Para-4 of the Government Letter prescribes that

where the Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay in the case of employees

awarded Selection Grade/Special Grade prior to 1.1.2006 and in whose cases the

Ordinary Grade scales of pay have been revised based on the recommendations

of the One Man Commission/further order of the Government, it shall be fixed as

per the scales of pay indicated in Annexure –I to the aforesaid letter following the

methodology of fixation of pay done in pre-2006 scales of pay as indicated in

Appendix-II of G.O. Ms. No.162, Finance (PC) Department dated 13.4.1998 by

revising the Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay and if such pay indicated

in the Annexure-I happens to be higher than the first level/second level

45 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

promotion posts, in such cases, the revised Selection Grade/Special Grade scales

of pay should be restricted to the level of the first and second level promotional

posts.

59. The above sub-clause (i) of Para 4 of the aforesaid letter, therefore,

clearly reveals that where Selection Grade/Special Grade is granted prior to

1.1.2006 or option is exercised for fixing the Selection Grade/Special Grade scale

of pay in respect of persons for whom the Selection Grade/Special Grade scale of

pay falls between 1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009, then the fixation of pay has to be

made only in the revised Selection Grade/Special Grade scale of pay by restricting

it to the level of the first level and second level promotional posts. However,

where such option is exercised by persons to receive the Selection Grade/Special

Grade scales of pay that fall between 1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009 on the date when it

enures to their benefit, then the scales of pay indicated in Annexure-I to the

aforesaid letter would be fixed.

60. In the present case, there is no quarrel with the fact that all the

petitioners have exercised their option to have their scales of pay revised on and

from the date when they reached the Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay

46 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

and such being the case, necessarily, sub-clause (i) of Para-4 of the aforesaid

letter stands triggered and that the Selection Grade/Special Grade pay of the

respective persons have to be fixed on the basis of Annexure-I to the aforesaid

letter, by restricting their pay to the level of their first level and second level

promotional posts.

61. Annexure-I to the aforesaid letter, which is necessary for fixing the pay

of the petitioners in the selection grade/special grade scales of pay, being of

much importance, the same is quoted hereunder :-

ANNEXURE 1

REVISED SELECTION GRADE AND SPECIAL GRADE SCALE OF PAY

Sl.No.Ordinary Grade

Rs.

Selection Grade

Rs.

Special Grade

Rs.

1) 4800-1000+1300 4800-10000+16505200-20200+1800

2) 4800-10000+1400 5200-20200+18005200-20200+1900

3) 4800-10000+1650 5200-20200+19005200-20200+2000

4) 5200-20200+1800 5200-20200+19005200-20200+2000

5) 5200-20200+1900 5200-20200+24005200-20200+2600

6) 5200-20200+2000 5200-20200+24005200-20200+2600

7) 5200-20200+2200 5200-20200+26005200-20200+2800

8) 5200-20200+2400 9300-34800+4200 9300-3400+4400

9) 5200-20200+2600 9300-34800+4200 9300-3400+4400

10) 5200-20200+2800 9300-34800+4300 9300-3400+4500

11) 9300-34800+4200 9300-34800+4400 9300-3400+4600

12) 9300-34800+4300 9300-34800+460015600-39100+5400

47 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

13) 9300-34800+4400 9300-34800+460015600-39100+5400

14) 9300-34800+4450 9300-34800+460015600-39100+5400

15) 9300-34800+450015600-39100+540015600-39100+5700

16) 9300-34800+460015600-39100+540015600-39100+5700

17) 9300-34800+470015600-39100+570015600-39100+6600

18)15600-39100+540015600-39100+600015600-39100+6600

19)15600-39100+570015600-39100+660015600-39100+7600

Note: The above selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay indicated above

takes notional effect from 1-1-2006 with monetary benefit from 1-1-2007 and

is applicable only to employees awarded Selection Grade/ Special Grade prior

to 1-1-2006 and employees who have opted for revised scale of pay on a

subsequent date after 1-1-2006 i.e., on date of Selection Grade / Special Grade

and in whose cases their Ordinary Grade scales of pay have been revised

further based on the recommendations of One Man Commission / further

Government Orders.

62. From the above tabular statement, it could be seen that the Ordinary

Grade scale of pay of the petitioners prior to their moving to the selection grade

is Rs.9300-34800 + GP 4500 and the selection grade scale of pay is Rs.15600-

39100 + GP 5400. However, as per sub-clause (i) of Para-4 of the aforesaid letter,

it would be evident that the revised scale of pay in the selection grade/special

grade, if higher than the first level/second level promotional posts, then in such

cases, the revised Selection Grade/Special Grade scales of pay should be

restricted to the first level and second level promotional posts, meaning thereby

48 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

that it should be fixed at the first level promotional post of B.T. Assistant in the

Ordinary Grade scale of pay, viz., Rs.9300-34800 + 4700 GP.

63. However, if no option had been exercised by the Government Servant,

then the selection grade/special grade scale of pay as indicated in Annexure-I to

the aforesaid letter would be payable in respect of the Government Servant, who

retired prior to 1.1.2006 and in the case of Government Servants, who have

exercised their option to come over to the revised scales of pay, it would be

effective on the date of the award of Selection Grade/Special Grade between

1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009.

64. Therefore, for the purpose of getting the benefit of the better pay

scale, be it the selection grade/special grade scale of pay under the revised pay

scale, it is left to the choice of the Government servant, more particularly, who

are the recipients of the selection grade/special grade scale of pay prior to

1.1.2006 and between 1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009 to exercise their option and the

exercise of their option determines the position in which they would be fit in, in

the revised scale of pay. Therefore, to the extent that the petitioners herein are

the recipients of the selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-PS prior to

49 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

1.1.2006 and between 1.1.2006 and 31.5.2009, the exercise of the option to have

the selection grade pay fixed on the date when the petitioners reach the

selection grade scale of pay puts them in the position of having their pay

determined and fixed at the first level promotional post with reference to the

selection grade scale of pay. That is why, there is a clear reference to sub-clause

(i) of Para-4 of the Letter No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-5, Finance Department dated

30.11.2010 in the letter No.14483 dated 5.1.2012.

65. Though the Pay Commission recommendations with regard to fixation

of pay scales are guided by the Government Letters, however, what is material to

be noted here is the fact that the scales of pay, as fixed in the various

Government Orders/Letters is guided by the Fundamental Rules applicable to the

Government Servants, more particularly, FR 22-B and the Rulings appended

thereto of which Ruling (11) (1) to which attention of this Court is drawn on

behalf of the petitioners, reads as under :-

(11) *(1) In cases where a Government servant who has

already been moved to Selection Grade or Special Grade of the

lower post prior to 1.1.2006 is promoted or appointed to a

higher post after 1.1.2006 and also in cases where a

Government servant has moved to Selection Grade or Special

Grade after 1.1.2006 and opted for revised scale of pay on a

50 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

subsequent date after 1.1.2006 in whose cases their Selection

Grade or Special Grade of the lower post carries identical or

higher pay band and or grade pay, the Government servant

shall be allowed to continue in the same identical or higher

pay band and grade pay applicable to Selection grade or

Special grade of the lower post as per the clarifications issued

in Government Letter No.45113/Finance (PC) department,

dated 17.08.2009 with one increment benefit either from the

date of promotion or appointment or from the date of accrual

of next increment in the lower post, based on the option

exercised by the Government Servant.

66. From the aforesaid Rule, which subsists even as on date and has

neither been rescinded nor replaced with the condition stipulated in para-4 (i) of

G.O. Ms. No.63305, it is clear that where a Government Servant, who has already

moved to Selection Grade/Special Grade of the lower post prior to 1.1.2006 is

promoted or appointed to a higher post after 1.1.2006 and also in cases where a

Government Servant has moved to Selection Grade/Special Grade after 1.1.2006

and opted for revised scale of pay on a subsequent date after 1.1.2006 in whose

cases their Selection Grade/Special Grade of the lower post carries identical or

higher pay band and/or Grade Pay, the Government Servant shall be allowed to

continue in the same identical or higher pay band and grade pay applicable to the

Selection Grade/Special Grade of the lower post as per the clarifications issued in

51 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Government Letter No.45113/Finance (PC) Dept., dated 17.08.2009 with one

increment benefit either from the date of promotion or from the date of accrual

of next increment in the lower post, based on the option exercised by the

Government Servant.

67. It is to be pointed out that it is well settled proposition that the

Fundamental Rule, which is a statutory rule has a march over the Government

Orders. Furthermore, without the Fundamental Rule having been amended in

accordance with law, the Rule 11 (1) as was in vogue would have to be followed

inspite of the fact that the Government Letter No.63305 provides a particular

course to be followed in fixation of pay in the selection grade/special grade scales

of pay.

68. Though a Note has been appended to FR 22-B to the effect that

fixation of pay shall take notional effect from 1.1.2006 with monetary benefit

from 1.1.2007 and all the conditions issued from time to time regarding notional

effect and monetary benefit for fixation of pay shall be adhered to, however, it is

to be pointed out that what is provided for in FR 22-B cannot be diluted unless

the main provision is amended and, therefore, the manner of fixation of pay

52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

which is provided for under FR 22-B cannot be diluted by means of another

Government Order, unless amendment is made to the said provision.

69. In the present case, there is a clear prescription in the Fundamental

Rule that the Government servant shall be continued in the same identical or

higher pay band and grade pay applicable to the selection grade/special grade of

the lower post in respect of persons, who have been moved to selection

grade/special grade prior to 1.1.2006 and those who have opted for revised

scales of pay in the selection grade/special grade on a subsequent date after

1.1.2006 and on their promotion they are permitted to retain the said scale and

without the said Rule being amended in the manner known to law, the

Government Letter in G.O. Ms. No.63305 which is based on the

recommendations of the One Man Commission relating to revision of scales of

pay, cannot be pressed into service, as it would run counter to the main FR 22-B

and the Fundamental Rule will have a march over the Government Letter.

70. It is also to be pointed out that the scale of pay has been sanctioned

and paid to the petitioners from the year 2008 till the date of their retirement. It

is not the case of the respondents that based on any fraud or misrepresentation

53 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

by the petitioners the revised selection grade scale of pay has been paid to the

petitioners. The abovesaid fact could be evident from the communication of the

Director of Elementary Education pertaining to an audit query in which the said

authority has clearly stated that the fixation of pay has been properly made and

that Selection Grade scale of pay has been rightly fixed for the petitioners.

71. Therefore, from the year 2008 till the date of their retirement,

somewhere in the year 2024 and thereafter, for more than a decade and a half,

the petitioners have been the recipient of the scale of pay, which was paid by the

respondents based on the fixation made by the respective authority. Such being

the case, when the receipt of the said amount was not on account of fraud or

misrepresentation by the petitioners nor could it be said to be due to fraud or

collision on the part of the respondents, the unilateral action of the respondents

to order recovery is grossly unjustified, moreso, when FR 22-B runs counter to

the said fixation.

72. Further, it is also to be pointed out, though not relevant at this point of

time, that pursuant to the impugned order, when the respondents took the

decision to recover the amount from the petitioners, it is incumbent on the part

54 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

of the respondents to have put the petitioners on notice and called upon them,

by granting opportunity, to justify their case for receipt of the said selection

grade scale of pay, which has been given to them, by pointing out the audit

objection. However, once the audit objection was made, the impugned order

had come to be passed and it is sought to be enforced by issuing the orders of

recovery against the petitioners, which act, is nothing but a glaring violation of

principles of natural justice. When any order of recovery is directed against the

petitioners, principles of natural justice warrants an opportunity of hearing be

granted to the aggrieved persons before passing any orders. However, without

granting any opportunity to the petitioners, orders have been passed directing

the petitioners to remit the sum quantified as the amount of recovery, which act

is perverse, arbitrary and illegal and cannot be allowed to sustain.

73. Though the payment of a higher scale of pay to the petitioners was

neither due to any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioners nor

due to any fraud or collusion on the part of the officials of the respondents, but it

is an inadvertent act that had taken place in the fixation of pay, which was paid to

the petitioners, it would not be in the interest of the individuals, who have all put

in more than three decades of service and have retired from service and the

55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

amounts received by them would have been utilised in the course of their

livelihood during the respective period, calling upon the petitioners to repay the

amount so computed, as excess payment made to them, that too after their

retirement will definitely work great hardship, as the retiral benefits received by

them would be very much necessary for their survival at this distant point of

time.

74. True it is that the amount, which has been paid to the petitioners is

from public money, but the respondents ought to have been diligent enough

while interpreting their Government Orders and wrong interpretation by the

officials of the respondents leading to payment of alleged higher emoluments to

the petitioners cannot be put against them to claim recovery, that too after the

retirement of the petitioners from service, as that will work great hardship to the

petitioners, who are, by now, pensioners, in leading their retired life. Further, FR

22-B stares writ large against the respondents from refixing the pay of the

petitioners or effecting recovery by refixing their pay. Therefore, ordering

recovery at this stage of their career would not be justifiable, moreso, when the

petitioners cannot be mulcted with any responsibility in fixing their scale of pay.

56 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

75. Further, one other aspect that also requires to be pointed out here is

the fact that neither FR-22B nor the Government Letter No.45113/Finance (PC)

Dept., dated 17.08.2009, which have been noted above have been considered by

the Government while passing G.O. Ms. No.63305. When G.O. Ms. No.63305 has

curtailed certain benefit, which had already been granted to the Government

Servants upon their moving to Selection Grade/Special Grade prior to 1.1.2006

and also for movement to Selection Grade/Special Grade on a subsequent date

after 1.1.2006 till 31.5.2009 for retaining the higher pay band and grade pay in

the Selection Grade/Special Grade of the lower post, when the benefit is sought

to be restricted through G.O. Ms. No.63305, the respondents ought to have

amended FR 22-B and failure to amend FR 22-B would impact the application of

G.O.Ms. No.63305 and permit FR 22-B to lean in favour of the petitioners, as they

would be entitled to retain the higher pay band and Grade pay applicable to the

lower post upon their movement to the Selection Grade/Special Grade in the

lower post.

76. Though one ancillary contention has been addressed by the petitioners

that the Government Orders passed in the light of the Pay Commission

recommendations by the Finance Department cannot be modified by the

57 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

Education Department by refuting the benefit of Selection Grade/Special Grade

to the employees, however, in view of the findings aforesaid that the

Fundamental Rules would prevail over the Government letters/orders, the said

contention does not require to be addressed by this Court, but to merely state

that what is provided by the Finance Department through the Government

Orders, enforcement of the said Government Orders is always with the Education

Department and in the course of enforcement of the said Government Orders, if

orders are passed by the School Education Department to restrict certain

benefits, it cannot be said that the Government Orders of the School Education

Department transgresses the orders passed by the Finance Department so long

as the said Government Orders/Letters are in consonance with the Act and the

Rules.

77. One aspect which also leans very much in favour of the petitioners is

the fact that the petitioners have been recipient of selection grade scale of pay in

the post of HM-PS in the year 2008 or thereabouts. They have received the said

pay for more than 15 years and that the pay fixation has been made by the

District Education Officer. Further, to the audit query raised in respect of certain

individuals with regard to the fixation of pay in the Selection Grade scale of pay

58 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

upon promotion of the said persons as BT Assistants/HM-MS, the Director of

Primary Education, vide his communication dated 21.11.2019, has stated the

manner in which the pay of the petitioners have been fixed. The said audit query

has also been made only after a decade from the date of grant of Selection Grade

scale of pay. Such being the case, the erroneous fixation of Selection Grade

cannot be put against the petitioners.

78. Though it is the stand of the learned Advocate General that there

would be financial implication to the tune of Rs.1000 Crores on the exchequer if

the said error is allowed to continue, it is to be pointed out that the amounts

have already been paid to the petitioners of which some amounts have also been

recovered. There is no payment, which is due to be made to the petitioners

barring the payment of pension. For fixing the appropriate pension based on the

aforesaid reasoning, it is incumbent on the part of the State to amend FR 22-B

and upon amending FR 22-B, the respondents would be within their power to

refix the salary of the persons, who are in service and also the pension of the

retired persons, though they would not be entitled to recover any amount from

the petitioners. Therefore, the contention that there would be huge financial

burden on the exchequer if the anomaly is allowed to continue is merely a

59 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

figment of imagination on the part of the respondents, except for the above

payments, which could very well be corrected by the respondents in the manner

known to law.

79. The petitioners have also prayed consequential relief of grant of

Selection Grade scale of pay in the post of HM-MS, on the premise that the

petitioners have put in more than 10 years service in the post of HM-MS/B.T.

Assistant, as they were granted promotion to the post of HM-MS during 2008-

2009 and, therefore, on completion of 10 years in the post of HM-MS in the year

2019-2020, without there being any further promotion they would be entitled for

selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-MS.

80. The said prayer of the petitioners definitely needs to be considered

affirmatively in the light of their date of promotion to the post of HM-MS, as has

been held above that a Government servant is entitled to move to selection

grade scale of pay on completion of 10 years in a particular post and if the

respective petitioners have put in 10 years of continuous service in the post of

HM-MS without there being any subsequent promotion, then definitely, as per

the rules, the respective petitioners would be entitled for forward movement to

60 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

selection grade in the post of HM-MS and would be entitled to receive the

selection grade scale of pay in the post of HM-MS/B.T. Assistant.

81. It is to be noted that if such benefit of selection grade is to be granted,

definitely that would have financial implication on the State and definitely when

the same is to be provided to the petitioners, the State, to save the exchequer

from erroneous payment, needs to appropriately amend FR 22-B, which would

refix the pay of the Government servants in employment and also the pension of

the retired employees and based on such refixation, the appropriate selection

grade scale of pay could be provided to the petitioners. Therefore, it is for the

respondents/State to take appropriate action to amend FR 22-B so that

erroneous payment could be curbed.

82. One other issue, that has been put through in some of the petitions

before this Court relate to pay fixation, where higher scale of pay has been

granted on the premise of ‘junior drawing more pay than the senior’.

83. It is to be pointed out that pay could be fixed in respect of a senior

only where his/her junior draws more pay than the said senior. For fixing the

61 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

pay of the senior over and above or on par with the junior, both the junior and

senior should be in the same cadre post and if the junior and senior are in

different cadre posts, then necessarily the concept of junior drawing more pay

than the senior for fixing the pay of the senior on par with the junior would not

arise. The respective cadre of the junior and senior decides the pay of the junior

and senior and different cadres of the junior and senior would not lead to any

anomaly in the fixation of pay and any difference in pay between the senior and

the junior does not require any moderation, as the posts are in different cadres

and pay scales of the different cadres are different and, therefore, no higher

fixation for the senior could be granted. Therefore, following the well structured

and time tested formula, the pay has to be fixed in the case of junior and senior

and in case where the pay is erroneously fixed, it has to be refixed, but the

amounts, if any, paid to the individuals/respective petitioners cannot be

recovered, as it was not due to any fault of the petitioners. If at all the

respondents seek to curtail the monetary benefit that is being paid to such

persons, the respondents, at best, could refix the amount of pay by correcting

the pay scale that the respective petitioners would be entitled to receive and no

amount can be recovered from the petitioners, as such error was not on account

of the petitioners. Therefore, any order of recovery passed against the

62 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

petitioners on the aforesaid ground also cannot be sustained. However, orders

could be passed for fixing the scale of pay, which the respective petitioners would

be entitled to receive in accordance with law/Fundamental Rules so as to enable

the respective petitioners to draw the appropriate revised pension, which could

be done only in accordance with law.

84. Since audit queries are pending with regard to the selection grade pay

granted to the petitioners, who have since retired from service, their pension

have been computed and paid on a lower scale of pay, though as on the said

date, the petitioners were paid a higher pay and without there being any

modification of the scale of pay on the basis of the rules, which were in vogue

then, the computation of pension on a different scale of pay than the one

received by the petitioners, who have since retired is wholly erroneous and,

therefore, necessarily, the pension of the aforesaid retired petitioners have also

to be computed on the basis of the scale of pay that was receivable by them at

that point of time and pension has to be calculated on the said scale of pay and

arrears ought to be paid to them, till such time, FR 22-B is amended and the scale

of pay of the petitioners is revisited. Therefore, necessarily a direction needs to

be given to the office of the Accountant General to compute the pension on the

63 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

scale of pay which the petitioners were drawing on the date of their retirement,

if not computed on the said scale, and pay the arrears of pension on the higher

scale to the petitioners, if not already paid. However, subsequent to amendment

of FR 22-B and refixation of proper scales of pay, the pension could be

recomputed on the refixed scale of pay and the retired Government servants

could be paid the appropriate pension.

85. In the result, all the writ petitions are disposed of with the following

directions:-

i)The impugned order directing the fixation of the

selection grade/special grade scale of pay at the first

promotional level and 2

nd

promotional level is set aside

to the extent that there shall be no recovery of

amount, which has already been paid, from the

petitioners ;

ii)Insofar as the petitioners, who have retired from

service is concerned, no amount shall be recovered on

the basis of the impugned order from the retiral

64 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

benefits/pensionary benefits of the petitioners with

regard to the amount already paid;

iii)Insofar as the petitioners, who are still in service, no

amount shall be recovered on the basis of the

impugned order from the salary of the petitioners with

regard to the amount already paid;

iv)In case any amount has already been recovered from

any of the petitioners towards excess payment made

in the selection grade scale, the same shall not be

refunded to the petitioners and the respondents shall

refix the selection grade scale of pay of the said

petitioners after amendment to FR 22-B and,

thereafter, upon computation, if any amount is due

and payable to any of petitioners, the same shall be

paid by the respondents forthwith;

v)Until FR 22-B is amended so as to include the

directions given in G.O. Ms. No.63305/Pay Cell/2010-1

dated 8.11.2010, more particularly para 4 (i) of the

said Government Order, no action shall be taken by

65 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

the respondents to refix the scale of pay of the

petitioners and similarly placed persons;

vi)Subject to amendment, if any, that may be made to FR

22-B, with reference to G.O. Ms. No.63305/Pay

Cell/2020-1 dated 8.11.2020, the respondents are at

liberty to revise the salary of the persons who are in

service by refixing their scales of pay in the selection

grade as also the pensionary benefits of the

pensioners by refixing their scales of pay in selection

grade in line with the amendments that may be made

to FR 22-B for computing the admissible pension

payable based on para 4 (i) of G.O. Ms. No.63305/Pay

Cell/2010-1 dated 8.11.2010, which shall be applicable

only prospectively and not retrospectively;

vii)Pursuant to the amendment, if any, made to FR 22-B,

upon refixation of the scales of pay of the petitioners,

and computing the revised pay that the petitioners

who are in service would be entitled to and the revised

monthly pension that the retired petitioners would be

66 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

entitled to, it is made clear that the petitioners would

also be entitled for selection grade benefit in the post

of HM-MS upon completion of 10 years of service in

the said post;

viii)The grant of selection grade scale of pay in the post of

HM-MS shall be fixed after amendment to FR 22-B and

after refixing the selection grade scale of pay of the

petitioners in the erstwhile post of HM-PS and

monetary benefit, if any payable, shall be computed

and paid to petitioners from the date when they

become eligible for such selection grade scale of pay,

including arrears of pay.

ix)The Accountant General is directed to compute the

pension in the scale of pay which the petitioners were

drawing on the date of their retirement, if not

computed in the said scale, and pay the arrears of

pension on the said higher scale to the retired

petitioners, if not already paid;

67 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

x)Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

02.03.2026

Index : Yes / No

GLN

Note to Registry :

Registry is directed to incorporate all the cause

title along with the prayer in the drafted order

while issuing order copy to the parties.

68 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

To

1.The Principal Secretary to Government

School Education Department

Government of Tamil Nadu

Secretariat, Fort St. George

Chennai 600 009.

2.The Director of School Education

Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam

College Road, Chennai 600 006.

3.The Director of Elementary Education

Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam

College Road, Chennai 600 006.

4.The District Educational Officer (Elementary)

Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

5.The Block Development Officer

Kumbakonam Block

Thanjavur District.

6.The Secretary

Finance Department

Government of Tamil Nadu

Secretariat, Fort St. George

Chennai 600 009.

69 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

____________

W.P. Nos.12275/2024, etc.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

GLN

PRE-DELIVERY ORDER IN

W.P. NOS.12275 OF 2024, ETC.

Pronounced on

02.03.2026

70 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis