C.H. MANOHAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the impugned orders passed by the first respondent / the Secretary to Government, Finance (T&AII) Department, Chennai, namely, letter No.36845/ka.ka.2/2009, dated 31.03.2010 and the letter No.46234/T&A II, dated 09.11.2011, by calling for the records connected thereto and consequently, to direct the respondents to issue orders re-fixing the basic pay of the petitioner as Rs.1550/- on 01.07.1988 and to revise consequentially the petitioner's pay and pension till date and to pay all consequential benefits including the arrears of pay and pension from 01.07.1988 to till date.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, after the petitioner and one Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan were selected by the TNPSC for the post of Junior Assistant, they were allotted to the Treasuries and Accounts Department and their respective seniority are 196 and 200 and they had also joined to the said post on 16.09.1974. Although the initial pay was fixed for both of them at Rs.205-/-, subsequently, after the introduction of Vth Pay Commission, the petitioner's pay was fixed as Rs.1500/-, while fixing the scale of pay to one Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan at Rs.1550/-, relying upon a higher scale of pay fixed to one Mr.K.N.Mohan, who is junior to both of them. He further stated that, in the seniority list prepared to the post of Sub-Treasury Officer/Superintendent in Treasuries and Accounts Subordinate Service, both Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan and Mr.K.N.Mohan were placed below the petitioner. Therefore, on coming to know this fact that the scale of pay of one Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan was stepped up, the petitioner made a representation to the second respondent seeking re-fixation of his pay at Rs.1550/- with effect from 01.07.1988 on par with his juniors --- Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan and Mr.K.N.Mohan, but, the same was rejected and finally, on appeal, the first respondent also rejected his appeal on 31.03.2010.

(3.) LEARNED Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, by filing a detailed counter affidavit, submitted that, as per the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules, all the posts upto the level of the Accountants, each District is considered as a separate Unit for the purpose of seniority, promotion, etc., therefore, in this regard, the Government also issued a clarification vide letter dated 06.05.1988, clarifying that in cases, where the seniors and juniors belong to the two different districts, in the lower post of Accountant, the conditions prescribed in ruling 2 under Fundamental Rule 22B cannot be invoked to their advantage or in other words, the disparity in pay cannot be rectified in such cases. Therefore, he pleaded, the petitioner, who belongs to Vellore Unit, cannot claim pay parity with his counterpart, namely, Mr.R.V.Muthukrishnan and Mr.K.N.Mohan, working at Chennai Unit, who may happen to be his juniors. On this basis, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.