The Madras High Court has ruled that full time employees of Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University are not entitled to higher allowances for holding additional charge of posts such as Registrar and Controller of Examinations.
Justice K.K. Sasidharan passed the order while dismissing a writ petition filed by an Assistant Professor of the university, seeking payment of ‘additional charge allowance’ given to Group A and B officers in State Government service.
According to the petitioner, the university had asked her to hold charge, in addition to her regular duties, of the posts of Deputy Controller of Examinations, Controller of Examinations and Registrar for different tenures between August 2010 and May 2013.
However, when she claimed payment of monetary allowances for having held additional charge of the three posts, the Registrar of the University declined to make any such payment by citing the university statute and hence the present writ petition.
Concurring with the rejection order passed by the Registrar, the judge said that the university had framed its own statute, notwithstanding the Government Orders passed for paying additional charge allowance, and that statute does not provide for any such allowance.
Further, stating that the petitioner had not challenged the validity of the statute, Mr. Justice Sasidharan said that an employee governed by the statute of a university could not claim allowances by relying upon Fundamental Rules applicable to government servants.
He also pointed out that it was not the case of the petitioner that the appointment order issued to her contained an undertaking by the university to pay her extra allowances for holding additional charge.
Justice K.K. Sasidharan passed the order while dismissing a writ petition filed by an Assistant Professor of the university, seeking payment of ‘additional charge allowance’ given to Group A and B officers in State Government service.
According to the petitioner, the university had asked her to hold charge, in addition to her regular duties, of the posts of Deputy Controller of Examinations, Controller of Examinations and Registrar for different tenures between August 2010 and May 2013.
However, when she claimed payment of monetary allowances for having held additional charge of the three posts, the Registrar of the University declined to make any such payment by citing the university statute and hence the present writ petition.
Concurring with the rejection order passed by the Registrar, the judge said that the university had framed its own statute, notwithstanding the Government Orders passed for paying additional charge allowance, and that statute does not provide for any such allowance.
Further, stating that the petitioner had not challenged the validity of the statute, Mr. Justice Sasidharan said that an employee governed by the statute of a university could not claim allowances by relying upon Fundamental Rules applicable to government servants.
He also pointed out that it was not the case of the petitioner that the appointment order issued to her contained an undertaking by the university to pay her extra allowances for holding additional charge.
No comments:
Post a Comment