(This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.012605/E1/2016 dated 11.08.2016 of the 1st Respondent herein and the consequential impugned proceedings of 2nd Respondent in A.T.MU.No.1885/A7/2019 dated 03.09.2020 and the consequential order of the 3rd Respondent in A.T.Mu.No.319/A2/2020 dated 14.09.2020 and quash the same.)

Heard Mr.S.N.Ravichandran, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.J.Pradeep, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents and perused the materials available on record.

2. By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has assailed the action of the 3rd Respondent in issuing Proceedings dated 14.09.2020 bearing A.T.Mu.No.319/A2/2020 seeking to recover the incentive increments granted to him under G.O.Ms.No.42 Education Department dated 10.01.1969, pursuant to the Proceedings dated 11.08.2016 bearing Na.Ka.No.012605/E1/2016 issued by the 1st Respondent and consequential Proceedings dated 03.09.2020 bearing A.T.Mu.No.1885/A7/2019 issued by the 2nd Respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that despite the Petitioner having been granted incentive increment for possessing the B.Ed. qualification way back in the year 2014 with effect from 14.12.2013, 3rd Respondent by issuing the impugned Proceedings dated 14.09.2020 has sought to recover the said incentive increment granted after six years of it being granted.

                          3.1. It is the further case of the Petitioner that the Full Bench of this Court by the Common Order dated 11.06.2026 in W.P.Nos.27261 of 2019 & etc. batch, considering a similar issue, namely, whether the incentive increment granted under G.O.Ms.No.42 Education Department dated 10.01.1969 can be withdrawn by G.O.Ms.No.37 Personal and Administrative Reforms (FR-IV) Department dated 10.03.2020, had held that wherever incentive increment was granted prior to the issuance of the G.O.Ms.No.37, not only can no recovery be made, but continuation of the incentive increments already granted also stands protected. Thus, it is contended that since the Petitioner has been granted incentive increments with effect from 14.12.2013, the aforesaid decision of this Court would apply in all force to the case of Petitioner.

                          3.2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner also submitted that the observations made by the Full Bench of this Court in the Common Order dated 11.06.2026 passed in W.P.Nos.27261 of 2019 & etc. batch would squarely covers the matter not only in relation to recovery but also in relation to continuance of incentive increment granted. Thus, it is contended that the impugned proceedings issued by the Respondents are illegal.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents contended that acquiring B.Ed qualification is a pre-requisite for holding the post of Headmaster and since, the Petitioner having acquired the said qualification for being promoted to the post of Headmaster. Subsequently, he is not entitled to claim incentive increment under G.O.Ms.No.42 Education Department dated 10.01.1969. It is further contended that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by Order dated 25.06.2026 in W.P.No.14561 of 2025 following the Full Bench decision of this Court in W.P.Nos.27261 of 2019 & etc. batch had only granted protection from recovery of the incentive increments already granted; that the Petitioners therein were required to make a fresh application, to be considered under G.O.Ms.No.95 Human Resources Management (FR-IV) Department dated 26.10.2023; and insofar as continuation of incentive increments is concerned, the same was confined to the Petitioners therein for the purpose of pension and cannot be applied to all cases.

5. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

6. At the outset, the action of the Respondent seeking to withdraw the incentive increments granted to the Petitioner more than a decade back on the basis of the subsequently issued Government Orders, cannot be permitted. Further, the Full Bench of this Court, having considered the issue relating to the grant of incentive increments from the date of issuance of G.O.Ms.No.42 till the date of issuance of G.O.Ms.No.37 dated 10.03.2020, and having held that it is only those applications which were made and pending consideration on the date of issuance of G.O.Ms.No.37 dated 10.03.2020 not being entitled for grant of incentive increment under G.O.Ms.No.42, as the said G.O. was cancelled and are required to be dealt with in accordance with the new G.O.Ms.No.95 dated 26.10.2023, the contention urged on behalf of the Respondents cannot be countenanced.

7. In the facts of present case, the 3rd Respondent had granted incentive increments to the Petitioner in the year 2014 with effect from 14.12.2013. Thus, it cannot be said that at the time of issuance of G.O.Ms.No.37 dated 10.03.2020, the Application of the Petitioner was pending consideration, requiring him to make an Application afresh to be dealt under G.O.Ms.No.95 dated 26.10.2023.

8. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned proceedings, by which, the Respondents sought to recover the incentive increments granted to the Petitioner in the year 2014 with effect from 14.12.2013 cannot be sustained.

9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings issued by the Respondents are set aside. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.