MADURAI: Dismissing a plea by a retired instructor who was preventing since 2014, in opposition to wage disparity between him and his junior over a meagre distinction, the Madras excessive courtroom has noticed that if such varieties writ petitions are entertained by the courts, then there is not going to be any finish to the litigations.
The courtroom was listening to a petition filed by Okay Thirumavalavan. The petitioner joined in service as BT assistant in Tamil in a faculty in 1973.
The petitioner who was working as a PG assistant retired from service on superannuation in 1994.
The grievance of the petitioner is that one other instructor who was his junior was drawing extra wage than him when he retired from service in 2011.
Therefore, the petitioner had moved the HC Madurai bench looking for to carry his wage equal to that of his junior and re-fix the pension and sought cost of arrears. Justice S Srimathy noticed that when in 10 years, there can be a pay fee revision and GOs and clarifications can be handed on this regard. The petitioner has acquired MA diploma in 1977 and obtained Rs 30 as increment and purchased BEd in 1982 and obtained Rs 50 as increment.
The junior has acquired BEd in 1987 and obtained Rs 90 as increment and purchased MA diploma in 1989 and obtained Rs 120 as increment.
“The motivation increment mounted for that individual 12 months can't be in contrast with earlier years. The wage and the motivation increment retains rising primarily based on the rise within the cash worth and inflation and due to this fact the declare of the petitioner is misguided,” noticed the decide.