Special-grade pay follows five years in selection grade; delayed placement requires a separate challenge.

The petitioner was appointed as a Demonstrator on 6 December 1976 and reclassified as an Assistant Professor/Lecturer on 7 January 1979.

He received Selection Grade in January 1994 and was granted the minimum revised pay of ₹14,940 in 1999, after completing five years in Selection Grade.

The petitioner challenged the Director of Collegiate Education’s proceedings dated 4 October 2018, contending that they applied a cut-off date of 27 July 1998 rather than 1 January 1996 and excluded him because he became an Assistant Professor before 1980.

The State maintained that he became eligible for the relevant benefit only after completing five years in Selection Grade.

1. Whether the proceedings dated 4 October 2018 were liable to be quashed for applying a cut-off date of 27 July 1998 and excluding the petitioner, allegedly contrary to the Government of India proceedings and Tamil Nadu G.O. (Ms.) No. 111.

2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the minimum revised pay of ₹14,940 from 1 January 1996 based on his total service, rather than upon completion of five years in Selection Grade.

The Court considered the Government of India’s MHRD proceedings dated 27 July 1998 and 6 November 1998, the latter revising the effective date to 1 January 1996, and Tamil Nadu G.O. (Ms.) No. 111, Higher Education Department, dated 24 March 1999.

Under the terms described in the judgment, a lecturer in Selection Grade/Reader in the specified pre-revised scale, if otherwise eligible and in that grade on 1 January 1996, could have pay fixed at the minimum of ₹14,940 in the revised scale upon completing five years in that grade.

The Court also considered the impugned proceedings’ provision requiring a cumulative 16 years of service for movement to the special-grade scale.

The Court found that the petitioner’s pleaded challenge concerned the 2018 proceedings on special-grade pay, whereas his argument in substance questioned why he had not received Selection Grade earlier, after 11 years’ service from 1979.

The impugned proceedings addressed the benefit available after five years in Selection Grade; the petitioner had received that benefit in 1999, on completing five years from January 1994.

The Court therefore held that the proceedings disclosed no infirmity in the manner in which the special-grade benefit was granted.

Any grievance about the timing of his initial Selection Grade placement had to be pursued separately and could not be resolved through this challenge.

It left open the petitioner’s ability to pursue any separate remedy concerning the allegedly delayed grant of Selection Grade.