A. Mary Jancy Rani vs The Director of School Education and Others

D. Hari Paranthaman, J.—The petitioner is a graduate trained teacher appointed in the Secondary Grade vacancy. The appointment of the petitioner was approved and she was paid salary for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. The petitioner also possessed the post graduate degrees, viz., M.Sc. Zoology and M.Ed. at the time of joining in the Secondary Grade Teacher post. The petitioner claimed incentive increment for her post graduation degrees, M.Sc. Zoology and M.Ed., but the same was rejected by the impugned order dated 22.05.2015, by the second respondent. This writ petition is filed challenging the said order.

A counter affidavit is filed by the second respondent seeking to sustain the impugned order. The second respondent has stated that at the time of joining the post as Secondary Grade Teacher, the petitioner was appointed on condition that she would not claim incentive increment for higher qualifications. In this regard, reliance is placed on G.O. Ms. No. 155, School Education Department, dated 03.10.2002.

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

It is true that the petitioner was appointed in the Secondary Grade vacancy, while she did not possess the qualification for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. She possessed the qualification for appointment as B.T. Assistant. Since there was dearth of candidates possessing secondary grade qualification, the graduate trained candidates were appointed before 11.07.1995. At that time, such candidates were appointed on condition that they shall not claim incentive increment for possessing higher qualifications. In my view, the said condition would apply to possession of the degree and B.Ed., i.e., the petitioner cannot seek for incentive increment for her B.Sc. and B.Ed. qualifications, while she was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher. But the petitioner cannot be denied incentive increment for acquiring post graduate degree in Zoology as well as in Education, ie., M.Sc. Zoology and M.Ed. In my view, acquiring of such higher qualifications have to be encouraged for the benefit of the students. If the teachers pursue their studies and acquire more higher qualifications, the same would certainly benefit the students. Hence, incentive increments are given by the Government.

In fact, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the issue is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in G. Meenalochini Vs. Chief Educational Officer--> , the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder:

"9. If the petitioner is granted incentive increment for her degree and B.Ed. qualification, while she was holding the post of Secondary Grade Teacher, the same are not correct and the excess amount paid towards incentive increment for the degree and B.Ed., qualification shall be recovered and refixation shall be made. But it is not so.

On the other hand, the petitioner claims incentive increment for acquiring Post Grade Degree namely M.A. and M.Ed. The very purpose of granting incentive increment is to encourage the teachers to acquire higher qualification as the same would ultimately benefit the students. The knowledge acquired by the teachers by acquiring higher qualification is rewarded by way of incentive increment only for the benefit of the students. The petitioner acquired Post Graduate Degree as well as M.Ed., qualification for which incentive increment was rightly paid. But unfortunately, the audit made objection as if the petitioner is not entitled to incentive increment for higher qualification, namely degree and B.Ed., which was a condition made at the time of appointment. Since the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher, due to the non availability of Secondary Grade qualified persons, a condition was imposed that the such teacher could not claim incentive increment for the Degree and B.Ed. qualification. But the same cannot be stretched to deny incentive increment for the Post Graduate degree and M.Ed., obtained by the petitioner for which, incentive increment were given in 1990 and 1999 respectively while the petitioner joined in service in 1987."

The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted similarly situated persons were granted incentive increment by G.O. (3D) No. 13, School Education Department, dated 06.02.2015.

For all the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed and the respondents are directed to grant incentive increment to the petitioner for the qualifications M.Sc. Zoology and M.Ed., within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.