A FAZULU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioners have been working as Assistant Inspectors of Sericulture. They had worked as Sericulture Demonstrators and as Junior Inspectors of Sericulture, during different periods. However, as the posts of Sericulture Demonstrators and Junior Inspectors of Sericulture had been merged, the services rendered by them, in the said posts, had to be counted for the purpose of granting senior scale and selection scale of pay, during the pay upgradation. Even though certain other similarly placed persons, as that of the petitioners, had been granted the pay benefits, the petitioners had not been granted such pay benefits. The representations submitted by the petitioners, requesting for the grant of such benefits, had been rejected, by the second respondent, by his impugned proceedings, dated 16.8.2011. In such circumstances, the petitioners had preferred the present writ petitions, before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) IT had been stated that, as per the relevant Government Orders, the petitioners are not entitled for the pay benefits, as claimed by them.