ORDER : (R. POORNIMA, J.) The writ petition in W.P(MD)No.20763 of 2016 is filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records in G.O(Ms) No.62 Finance (CMPC) Department dated 09.03.2015 as arbitrary and illegal direct the respondent to extend the benefits of G.O(Ms) No.216, Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993 and to award selection grade of pay with effect from 01.06.1988 and special grade with effect from 12.08.1990 and to revisionary benefits and arrears to the petitioner. 2. The brief case of the writ petitioner in W.P.(MD)No. 20763 of 2016 are as follows : 2.1) The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the cadre of Secondary grade teacher on 12.08.1970 in Z.K.M, Higher Secondary School, Bodinayakkanur, Theni district. He was transferred to the 6 th respondent School on 15.02.1977 and he retired from service on 30.06.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. During his service he got Selection Grade on 23.01.1980 and special grade on 12.08.1990 without any promotion. 2.2) He had completed 20 years service as Special Teacher in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher without any promotion opportunity and got Selection Grade and Special Grade after the completion of 10 and 20 years service respectively. 2.3) The benefit of Selection Grade scale of pay equal to the ordinary scale of pay of the promotion post and special grade scale of pay equal to the selection grade scale of pay of the promotion post were not given as per the direction in G.O (Ms) No.216, Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993. 2.4) Some other writ petitions were filed by group of teachers before this Court and the Court directed the respondents to extend the benefit to the said petitioner within a period of four months from the date of copy of the order. Following the common order, several similar orders passed by this Hon’ble Court in thousands of petitions. The Special Leave Petitions preferred by the respondents before the Hon’ble Apex court were also dismissed 2.5) Even after the verdict of the Apex Court, respondents did not extend the benefits to the said petitioners and no payments were made to them till date. Several Contempt Petitions were filed and thereafter benefits were extended to them. The Special Leave Petitions preferred by the respondents before the Hon’ble Apex court were also dismissed 2.5) Even after the verdict of the Apex Court, respondents did not extend the benefits to the said petitioners and no payments were made to them till date. Several Contempt Petitions were filed and thereafter benefits were extended to them. 2.6) G.O(Ms) No.62 dated 09.03.2015 made amendments in paragraph 3(ii) of the G.O(Ms)No.216, dated 22.03.1993 and the same were incorporated in paragraph 7 of the impugned order. As per the impugned clause 7(3) of the Government Order, the special teachers/physical education, teachers are not entitled for selection grade/special grade applicable to the the post of Primary School Headmaster. 2.7) It is settled law that any person aggrieved by the order of the Government approached the Court and the Court granted favourable order, the same would be applicable to other identical person. But the impugned Government Order take away the right of petitioner from getting the benefit under G.O(MS) No.216 dated 22.03.1983. 2.8) The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the following judgments : (a) The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in State of Karnataka Vs. N.Parameshwarappa reported in 2003 (12) SCC 192 as follows: "At the same time we do not find any reasonable justification to confine the relief to only such of the teachers who approached the court and having regard to the fact that relief related to the revision of scales of pay, every one of that class of teachers who approached would be entitled to the benefit, notwithstanding that they have not approached the Court". (b) The Hon'ble Apex Court has also held in Govind Ram Purohit Vs. Jagjiwan Chandra reported in 1999 SCC (L & S) 788 as follows: "Once the High Court had placed a particular interpretation on the Rules, the benefit of that interpretation had to go to all those who qualified under the seniority-cum-merit rule. There was no point in waiting for each and every person to file a petition. Therefore, we do not see any reason why we should entertain such a technical plea when the High Court has done substantial justice to all concerned". 3. There was no point in waiting for each and every person to file a petition. Therefore, we do not see any reason why we should entertain such a technical plea when the High Court has done substantial justice to all concerned". 3. The brief case of the writ petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 20764 of 2016 are as follows: 3.1) The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the cadre of Secondary grade teacher on 02.06.1969 in Nadar Saraswathi Girls Higher Secondary School, Theni District. She retired from service on 31.05.2007 on attaining the age of superannuation. During her service she got Selection Grade on 01.09.1979 and special grade on 01.09.1989 without any promotion. 4. The brief case of the writ petitioner in W.P.(MD) No. 20765 of 2016 are as follows: 4.1) The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the cadre of Secondary grade teacher on 17.11.1975 in Government Middle School, Kanyakumari District and then transferred to several schools. Later, he retired from service on 31.08.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation. During his service he got Selection Grade on 17.11.1985 and special grade on 17.11.1995 in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher. 5. The 4 th respondent filed counter by referring G.O (MS) No.62 dated 09.03.2015 as follows; "7(3). As the Secondary Grade teachers in Primary Schools is the feeder category for the post of Primary School Headmaster, they were allowed to count the services rendered on identical scale of pay prior to 01-06-1988 in the post of Secondary Grade Teachers for awarding selection Grade / Special Grade in the promotion post of Primary School Headmaster. In the case of Special Teachers and Physical Education Teachers, they have no choice for promotion as Primary School Headmaster with reference to Rule-2 of Tamilnadu Elementary Education Subordinate Service Special Rules. Hence, the Special Teachers / Physical Education Teachers are not entitled for selection Grade / Special Grade applicable to the post of Primary School Headmaster considering the services rendered in the post of Special Teachers /Physical Education Teachers." 5.1) With regard to Paragraph 3(ii) of the G.O (MS) No.216, Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993 says that, "3(ii). In respect of Secondary Grade Teachers in High Schools there is no promotion post for them as on 28.3.90 (i.e. the date of issue of the Government order second read above) although there is promotion post in Primary schools. In respect of Secondary Grade Teachers in High Schools there is no promotion post for them as on 28.3.90 (i.e. the date of issue of the Government order second read above) although there is promotion post in Primary schools. As a measure of uniformity in respect of all Secondary Grade Teachers, Government direct that the Teachers be made eligible for Selection / Special Grade as in Annexure I to the Government Order second read above" 5.2) The writ petitioner is not entitled to get Selection Grade / Special Grade on the basis of the G.O(MS)No.216 dated 22.03.1993. The issue was decided by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in its judgment dated 03.04.2002 in O.A.No.88 of 1996 filed by S.Vanasundari and others Vs. Director of School Education. 5.3) The observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.4582 of 1997 , between the Director of Education Vs. A.N.Kandasamy and another, wherein, the Apex Court viewed as follows. "The respondent has willingly joined Government High School service and therefore, they thereafter belonged to a separate cadre known as Secondary Education Service. On their absorption in Government Service they ceased to be part of the cadre of teachers serving in the schools run by Panchayat Union. Merely because their past service were counted for the purpose of protecting their pay and awarding Selection or Special Grade, it cannot be said that they continued to belong to the same old cadre. The very basis on which the Tribunal proceeded was wrong and therefore its decision stands vitiated" Since the absorbed teacher themselves are not eligible to get the benefits as if they continued to be in the Elementary Service, the Secondary Grade Teachers directly appointed to the High/Higher Secondary Schools are in no way eligible to get Selection Grade / Special Grade on par with Primary School Headmaster. 5.4) He further stated that this Court in a Review Application No.227 of 2015 (batch cases) dated 09.12.2016, has held as follows : “38. 5.4) He further stated that this Court in a Review Application No.227 of 2015 (batch cases) dated 09.12.2016, has held as follows : “38. Today, when the matters are taken up for consideration, keeping in mind the financial strain that would fall on the state exchequers in the event of the implementation of the G.O., and in order to give quietus to the issue, we feel it appropriate to fix the date as 01.03.2017 from which date onwards the Government shall calculate and revise the pension and family pension (without arrears) based on the revised scales of pay by implementing G.O. for the which the learned advocate general and learned councils appearing for the teachers fairly acceded to the same. Accordingly we pass the following. i) The Government is directed to implement the G.O. (Ms) No 216, dated 22.03.1993 for the period between 16.1988 and 31.12.1995, on and from 01.03.2017 onwards in respect of all the Secondary Grade Teachers of High/Higher Secondary Schools including the Special Teachers who attained Selection Grade/Special Grade during the above said period, on par with the pay scale of Primary School Headmaster ii) Consequently, the Government shall calculate and revise the pension of those who retired from service and revise the family pension in respect of those who expired, based on the revised scales of pay in terms of G.O.(Ms) No 216, dated 22.03.1993 payable on and from 01.03.2017. iii) It is made clear that the beneficiaries under the order are not entitled to the arrears of revised pay scales; iv) It is further made clear that the benefits as directed above, shall be extended to the parties who are before this court alone and no fresh petitions would be entertained on and from 09.12.2016.” 5.5) Based on the recommendations of the Director of School Education and on the above judgment, the Government published G.O (MS) No. 90, Schools Education (3(1)) Department dated 09.05.2018 as follows :- So far, the petitioners have not received any judgement for entitlement for extending the benefits under G.O.(MS) No.216, Finance (PC) Department, dated 22.03.1993. Hence these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. 6. Heard the learned counsel on either and perused the materials available on record 7. Hence these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. 6. Heard the learned counsel on either and perused the materials available on record 7. The petitioner Rajakani was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the guide of Secondary Grade Teacher on 12.08.1970 in Z.K.M Higher Secondary School and transferred to 6th respondent School, and retired from service on 30.06.2008. She filed this petition with prayer to award Selection Grade Scale of pay with effect from 01.06.1988, and Special Grade Scale of pay with 12.08.1990 and to pay revised pensionary benefit, and arrears. 8. The petitioner Kumarammal was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher on 02.06.1969 in Nadar Saraswathi Girls Higher Secondary School, Theni District and retired from service on 31.05.2007. She filed this petition with prayer to award Selection Grade Scale of pay with effect from 01.06.1988, and Special Grade Scale of pay with 01.09.1989 and to pay revised pensionary benefit, and arrears. 9. The petitioner Ramu was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher on 17.11.1975 in Government Middle School, Kanyakumari District and then transferred to several schools and retired from service on 31.08.1998. He filed this petition with prayer to award Selection Grade Scale of pay with effect from 01.06.1988, and Special Grade Scale of pay with 17.11.1995 and to pay revised pensionary benefit, and arrears. 10. The petitioners also pray to quash the para 7(3) of the G.O (MS) No. 62 dated 09.03.2015 illegal, and arbitrary. 11. The 5 th respondent after taking into considering the fact that no promotion for the Secondary Grade Teacher in High Schools, as a measure of uniformity in respect of all Secondary Grade Teacher, Government direct that the Teachers made eligible for Selection / Special Grade as per annexure-I to the G.O.(Ms)No.80 and issued G.O (MS) No. 216 Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993, the Government issued direction to made the Secondary Grade Teachers be eligible for Selection/Special Grade. However, Special Grade Teachers were denied relief as per the above Government Order, approached the Court with a prayer to extend the benefits to them and obtained favourable orders. Similarly placed Teachers filed one after another writ petitions claiming benefits under G.O (MS) No.216 Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993, before the Principal Bench as well as Madurai Bench and the same was allowed. Similarly placed Teachers filed one after another writ petitions claiming benefits under G.O (MS) No.216 Finance (PC) Department dated 22.03.1993, before the Principal Bench as well as Madurai Bench and the same was allowed. In the meantime, Government issued G.O.(Ms)No. 62 dated 09.03.2015 bringing certain amendments. In the meantime, number of writ petitions filed by the Teachers were allowed, against which Review application were filed by the Government and this Court took up the writ petition, writ appeal, review application, contempt petition to pronounce comprehensive judgment and passed the following : “Consequently, the Government should calculate and revise the pension of those who retired from service and revised the family pension in respect of those who expired, based on the revised scales of pay in terms of G.O.(Ms) No. 216 dated 22.03.1993 reads as follows : “i) The Government is directed to implement the G.O. (Ms) No 216, dated 22.03.1993 for the period between 16.1988 and 31.12.1995, on and from 01.03.2017 onwards in respect of all the Secondary Grade Teachers of High/Higher Secondary Schools including the Special Teachers who attained Selection Grade/Special Grade during the above said period, on par with the pay scale of Primary School Headmaster ii) Consequently, the Government shall calculate and revise the pension of those who retired from service and revise the family pension in respect of those who expired, based on the revised scales of pay in terms of G.O.(Ms) No 216, dated 22.03.1993 payable on and from 01.03.2017. iii) It is made clear that the beneficiaries under the order are not entitled to the arrears of revised pay scales; iv) It is further made clear that the benefits as directed above, shall be extended to the parties who are before this court alone and no fresh petitions would be entertained on and from 09.12.2016; v) The Government is directed to expedite the process of calculating and fixing the revised pension and family pension and we do hope that the Government will complete the same as early as possible without making any further delay; vi) All the matters which are at SR stage and listed before this Court are also ordered and disposed of by this common order and consequently, connected MPs thereof, are ordered.” 12. Based on that, the Government also published G.O.(Ms).No.90 School Education, 3(1) Department dated 9.5.2018 as follows : 13. Based on that, the Government also published G.O.(Ms).No.90 School Education, 3(1) Department dated 9.5.2018 as follows : 13. But the learned Government Advocate states that the above recommendations could be sanctioned only for those who receive judgement during the mentioned period. The judgement in clause four states that it should be extended to the party who are before the Court and no fresh petitions would be entertained on and from 9.12.2016. 14. All the writ petitioners were filed these writ petitions before the cut-off date and are eligible for benefit extended. Therefore, they cannot be denied the benefits as per G.O.(Ms)No.216 dated 22.03.1993, payable on and from 01.03.2017. 15. These writ petitioners to be considered as per the directions in the Review Application No.227 of 2015, order dated 09.12.2016. 16. Therefore, this Court directs the respondents to implement the Government Order in GO.(Ms)No.216 dated 22.03.1993 for the period between 01.06.1988 and 31.12.1995, payable on and from 01.03.2017 onwards to the petitioners as per the directions in the Review Application order dated 09.12.2016. 17. With these observation, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.