P THANGAVELU Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a B.T.Assistant in Government High School. He obtained higher qualifications and he was granted incentive increments for the same before pay revision.

(2.) After pay revision, the 3rd respondent who is junior to the petitioner obtained higher qualification and he was granted incentive increments. Since he was given incentive increments after pay revision, the junior got more pay. Hence an anomaly arose. The petitioner seeks pay on par with the pay of his junior.

(3.) The petitioner cannot be penalised for acquiring higher qualification at an earlier point of time. It is well settled that the seniors are entitled to equal pay on par with his juniors. The junior was granted higher pay since he obtained higher qualification after the pay revision. This could not be a reason to deny the equal pay for the petitioner.