R DAMODARAN Vs. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH regard to the first petitioner it has been stated that he was appointed as a secondary grade assistant in the year 1964. While so, by an order, dated 21.1.1976, one incentive was sanctioned for his B.Ed., qualification. In the year, 1979, the first petitioner was promoted as a Middle School Headmaster. By an order, dated 4.2.1986, another incentive was sanctioned for his M.A. qualification. In the year 1994, the first petitioner was granted the third incentive for his M.Ed. qualification. However, by an order, dated 29.3.1995, it was cancelled.

(2.) WITH regard to the second petitioner it has been stated that he was appointed as a Primary School Headmaster in the year 1963. While working as a Secondary Grade Assistant, he was sanctioned two incentives for his B.Ed., and M.Ed., qualifications by orders, dated 23.6.1985 and 16.11.1988. He was promoted as a Middle School Headmaster in the year 1992. In the year 1994, he was sanctioned the third incentive by an order, dated 17.3.1994. However, by the impugned order, dated 29.3.1995, it was cancelled. In such circumstances, the petitioners had filed an original application before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.6410 of 1995, which has been transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.16017 of 2006.

(3.) THE learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent has not been in a position to show that the incentive increments were granted to the petitioners due to their misrepresentation or fraud. Nothing has been shown by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent, by way of records, to substantiate the averments made by the respondent in his reply affidavit. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.1995, issued in reference number Na.Ka.2083/A1/94, is set aside and the writ petition stands allowed. No costs.