Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus for Ratification of Pay Stepping Up of Retired Sheristadar. Court Holds That Article 226 of the Constitution Does Not Permit Issuance of a Direction to the Government to Ratify Pay Fixation as Such Decisions Are Administrative in Nature and Require Verification by Competent Authority, Including the Principal Accountant General.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal In Favour of Prosecution
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed by a retired Sheristadar seeking a writ of mandamus against the Government of Tamil Nadu and other authorities for ratification of his refixed pay consequent to stepping up on par with a junior. The petitioner had superannuated on 31.05.2022. His pay had been stepped up by orders of the Principal District Judges of Vellore and Krishnagiri, but the government had not ratified the fixation. The petitioner sought compensation and interest for delay. During proceedings, the court impleaded the Principal District Judges and the Principal Accountant General. The core legal issue was whether the High Court in judicial review under Article 226 could compel the government to ratify an administrative pay fixation. The court observed that ratification requires following procedures and approval of the Principal Accountant General, and such decisions are for the executive, not for judicial direction. It held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to the government to ratify the pay fixation. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed without costs, and the petitioner was advised to approach the competent authority for further action.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Judicial Review and Administrative Decisions - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The petitioner, a retired Sheristadar, sought a mandamus directing the government to ratify pay step-up fixation. The court held that judicial review does not extend to directing the government to ratify a pay fixation; such decisions are for the competent authority following prescribed procedures and subject to verification by the Principal Accountant General. Held that the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the government to ratify the pay fixation done by stepping up of pay.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs. Petitioner may approach competent authority for necessary action.

Law Points

  • Legal points not extracted
  • judicial review
  • pay stepping up
  • ratification by government
  • administrative decision
  • no mandamus to compel government to ratify pay fixation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (07) 99

W.P.No.16945 of 2026

2026-07-02

S.M.Subramaniam, N.Senthilkumar

Citation not available, 2026:MHC:3002

Mr.V.J.Arulraj for petitioner; Dr.R.Gouri, Government Counsel for Respondent-1; Mr.P.Manorajan for Respondent-5

M.Arul

The Secretary to Government, Home (Courts V) Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, The Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Madras, The Principal District Judge, Vellore District, The Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri District, The Principal Accountant General (A and E), Chennai

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the government to ratify the refixation of his pay, and to award compensation and interest for delay

Filing Reason

Government had not passed orders ratifying the pay fixation done by stepping up

Previous Decisions

The pay was stepped up by proceedings of the Principal District Judges, but ratification by the government was pending

Issues

Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the government to ratify a pay fixation made by stepping up of pay.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner contended that his pay was stepped up but requires government ratification which was not granted. Court held that in judicial review, it cannot direct the government to ratify; such decisions must be taken by the competent authority following procedures and with the approval of the Principal Accountant General.

Ratio Decidendi

In exercise of judicial review under Article 226, the High Court cannot issue a mandamus directing the government to ratify a pay fixation done by stepping up of pay. Decisions regarding ratification are administrative and must be taken by the competent authority following prescribed procedures and with the approval of the Principal Accountant General.

Judgment Excerpts

This Court is of the considered view that in exercise of powers of judicial review, this Court cannot direct the Government to ratify the fixation done in the matter by stepping up of pay. Thus, it is for the petitioner to approach the competent authority for necessary action.

Procedural History

Petitioner, a retired Sheristadar, filed the writ petition. During proceedings, respondents 2 to 4 were impleaded as per court order, and respondent 5 was suo motu impleaded. The case was heard and dismissed on the same day as the impleadment orders.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus for Ratification of Pay Stepping Up of Retired Sheristadar. Court Holds That Article 226 of the Constitution Does Not Permit Issuance of a Direction to the Government to Ratify Pay Fixation a...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows State’s Intra-Court Appeal, Restores Bar on Promotion Due to Currency of Punishment. Punishment Imposed under Rule 8 of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules Held to Preclude Promotion During Its Currency ...