TAMILNADU RETIRED LIVESTOCK Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorafied mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent vide Government Letter No. 7627/Kapa-7/2013-6 dated 01.04.2014 rejecting the request of the petitioner Association for fixation of pay to the post of Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisor under 22(B) of the Fundamental Rule(herein after referred to as "the rules") and to further direct the respondents to pay arrears with 12% interest from the date of promotion till the date of realisation.

(2.) It appears that 153 members of the petitioner Association, stated to have retired from service in the post of Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisor. While they were working as Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisors, their scale of pay having not been fixed under Rule 22 -B of the Rules after their promotion to the said post, a representation was made by them to the second respondent. The second respondent had recommended their case to the Government for fixation of their scale of pay under 22 -B of the Rules as they were entitled to the same. However, the Government though in respect of similarly situated Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisors had fixed the scale of pay, taking into consideration the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 9451 of 2007, but rejected the prayer made by the petitioner Association vide impugned order dated 01.04.2014 in spite of settled position of law to extend such benefit to a non petitioner similarly situated as held in W.P. No. 25136 of 2012 dated 11.07.2013. Therefore, the same has been challenged to be illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law in this writ petition with a prayer to quash the same and consequentially fixed their pay extending the benefit of Rule 22-B and release the monetary benefit.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is admitted that the petitioners who were promoted to the aforesaid post, but they were denied with the claim inasmuch benefit of 3% increment on the pay including grade pay can only be extended on promotion with effect from 01.01.2006. Therefore, Fundamental Rule 22 B has not been made applicable after 01.01.2006. In view of the order passed by this Court in the afore said writ petition in the case of one Thiru N. Kunjappan, Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisor(retired), who is similarly placed employee, was extended the benefit of 5% pay fixation vide Government Letter No. 7627/Kapa- 7/2013-6 dated 01.04.2014 as provided under 22-B of the Rules but there being no such direction in favour of the 153 members of the petitioner Association, that they are not entitled to 5% benefit under 22-B of the Rules, hence their prayer in this regard is without any substance, therefore, the impugned order needs no interference. The order passed in W.P. No. 25136 of 2012 in the case of (C.B. Prabakaradu and Others v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others) dated 11.07.2013 directing the Government to extend the benefit of higher start of pay with effect from 01.06.1988 to the petitioners and non-petitioners therein, in view of the anomaly in fixation of pay and extending such benefit to the persons, who had not approached this Court is concerned, the same being not relatable to the Rule 22 -B of the Rules, the petitioner's claim that the benefit extended to Thiru N. Kunjappan to similarly situated employees of the petitioner's association, even if they had not approached this Court, is without any substance and as such this writ petition filed is liable to be dismissed.