High Court Allows Writ Petition for Pay Stepping Up in Education Department Case. The court found that the petitioner was entitled to stepping up of pay due to a pay anomaly where his junior earned more despite similar qualifications.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed by a petitioner employed as a P.G. Assistant at a government higher secondary school, challenging an order from the Education Department that rejected his request for stepping up his pay to match that of his junior. The petitioner was promoted to his position in 2007, while his junior was promoted later, resulting in a pay anomaly where the junior earned more despite having similar qualifications. The petitioner argued that the rejection of his pay stepping proposal was contrary to established legal principles, citing a similar case where the court directed reconsideration of a pay anomaly. The government advocate acknowledged the similarity of the cases but contended that the petitioner’s pay was consistently lower than his junior's, thus opposing the stepping up. The court analyzed the legal principles surrounding pay anomalies and the stepping up of pay, referencing relevant judgments, including one from the Supreme Court. It concluded that the petitioner was entitled to have his pay stepped up to rectify the anomaly and directed the respondents to re-evaluate the proposal, ensuring the petitioner received the appropriate pay and arrears from the date of filing the writ petition. The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned order and mandating action within twelve weeks.

Headnote

A) Employment Law - Pay Anomaly - Stepping Up of Pay - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court held that when a senior employee's pay is lesser than that of a junior due to promotion timing, the principle of stepping up applies to rectify the anomaly. The court directed the respondents to reconsider the proposal for stepping up the petitioner's pay to match that of his junior, effective from the date of the anomaly (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to stepping up of pay on par with his junior due to pay anomaly.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the respondents to reconsider the proposal for stepping up the petitioner's pay to Rs.22,260/- effective from 30.12.2010, granting all benefits and arrears from the date of filing the writ petition.

Law Points

  • Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
  • pay anomaly
  • stepping up of pay
  • equal pay for equal work
  • Fundamental Rules
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (09) 67

WP No. 33167 of 2022

2026-09-03

C.Kumarappan

Ms.Suneetha, Mr.V.Sivalingam

P.Gajapathy

The Commissioner, Education Department and others

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the rejection of a pay stepping proposal.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought to quash the order and step up his pay to match his junior's.

Filing Reason

The petitioner claimed a pay anomaly where his pay was less than that of his junior.

Previous Decisions

The proposal for stepping up pay was rejected by the first respondent.

Issues

Entitlement to stepping up of pay Existence of pay anomaly

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued for stepping up due to pay anomaly Respondent contended that the petitioner’s pay was consistently lower

Ratio Decidendi

The principle of stepping up of pay applies when a senior's pay is lower than that of a junior due to promotion timing, ensuring equal pay for equal work.

Judgment Excerpts

The stepping up should be done in such a way that the anomaly in juniors getting higher salary than the senior in the promoted category of Head Clerk would be removed. In this case, admittedly, there is no special qualification acquired by the junior of the petitioner to have more pay. The court has found positively that the petitioner is entitled for stepping up of pay.

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 02.07.2022, which rejected the stepping up of pay proposal.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Petitioners in Medical Education Matter Concerning CPS Diploma Recognition. De-Recognition Notification Dated 12 February 2018 Could Not Retrospectively Extinguish Vested Rights of Students Admitted Under Notification Dated ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Arbitration Agreement Due to Lack of Validity. The court found that the clause in the contract did not constitute a valid arbitration agreement under Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996...