R. SARAVANAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to grant incentive increments to the petitioner for acquiring B.Ed., qualification and grant arrears of increments as per G.O.Ms. No. 240, School Education (VE) Department, dated 18.8.2010. [hereinafter called as "G.O.Ms. No. 240"].

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner made a submission that the writ petitioner was initially appointed as Double Part Time Vocational Instructor in Accountancy and Auditing on 21.9.1984 at S.K.P.D. Boy's Higher Secondary School, Chennai on consolidated pay. The appointment of the writ petitioner was approved by the Chief Educational Officer and he was absorbed as Full Time Vocational Instructor in regular time scale of pay from 01.04.1990 as per the proceedings of the Chief Educational Officer, Chennai, dated 30.3.1991. In proceedings dated 10.7.2007, the services of the writ petitioner was regularised in the post of Vocational Instructor from 01.04.1990. The writ petitioner has acquired the educational qualification of M.Com., and B.Ed. He acquired M.Com., degree from Madras University in May,1987 and B.Ed., from Annamalai University in December, 1988. Based on the qualifications acquired by the petitioner, he claims that he is eligible for two incentive increments as per G.O.Ms.No. 240. However, the writ petitioner is admitted that one incentive increment was already sanctioned and he has been receiving the benefit and second incentive increment for B.Ed., alone was denied. In this regard, the writ petitioner submits that he is entitled for the same by following above said G.O. Ms. No. 240.

(3.) Now, this Court has to examine as to whether the petitioner is eligible to receive the second incentive increment as per the said G.O.Ms.No. 240. The learned Additional Government Pleader made a submission that the fourth respondent District Educational Officer, filed a detailed counter and it is clearly stated that the writ petitioner is not eligible for second incentive increment as per G.O.Ms.No. 240. In fact, G.O.Ms.No. 240 was issued based on the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos. 6273 to 6276 of 2005, dated 02.12.2008. In accordance with the said G.O.Ms.No. 240, the writ petitioner was sanctioned with one set of increment and therefore, he is not eligible for second set of increment as per the G.O.Ms.No. 240, in view of the fact that the writ petitioner has not acquired the qualification as prescribed in the said G.O.Ms.No. 240.