SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 860

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
B.C. Nagaraj and Another – Appellants
Versus
The State of Karnataka and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 5529-5530 of 2023
Decided On : 13-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Charudatta Vijayrao Mahindrakar, AOR Mrs. Darshana Mahindrakar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Prateek K Chadha, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Sreekar Aechuri, Adv. Ms. Pragya Ganjoo, Adv. Ms. Muskaan Singla, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
Pay scale – There cannot be undue discrimination in matter of grant of revised pay scale to similarly placed employees.

Headnote:

Service Law – Pay scale – Denial of benefits of pay revision – There is no reason why appellants should be denied same relief when same benefit was granted to similarly placed employees – State Government directed to extend benefits under Government Order revising pay scale of Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Directors in Government colleges, to appellants within a period of three months – This judgment will apply to all cases, pending before either Administrative Tribunal or High Court, of similarly situated employees in which a similar relief is claimed – However, this judgment shall not be used to file new cases by retired employees who have been denied benefit and who have not challenged the action till date – No case which has been concluded, shall be reopened on the basis of this judgment. (Paras 10, 11 and 12)

Facts of the case:

Appellants were denied benefit of Government Order dated 15th November 1999, revising pay scale of Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Directors in Government colleges. Appellants filed an application before Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, which was rejected. They filed a Writ Petition before High Court to challenge order of Tribunal. Writ Petition was dismissed by impugned judgment.

Findings of Court:

It was a conscious decision of State Government to accept decision of High Court in the case of Shri N. Ramesh. Now, the State Government cannot rely upon the Government Order dated 4th July 2008, which was not pointed out to Courts which dealt with case of Shri N. Ramesh.

Result : Appeals allowed.

JUDGMENT :

ABHAY S. OKA, J.

FACTUAL ASPECTS

1. The appellants were employed initially as Physical Instructors in Government Grade Colleges in Karnataka. The first appellant reached the selection grade pay scale of the University Grants Commission (UGC) on 1st January 1986. The second appellant was granted senior scale of pay on 1st January 1986 and selection grade of pay from 13th July 1990. The first appellant was superannuated on 31st January 1998, and the second appellant was superannuated on 31st May 2004. Both, at the time of retirement, were selection grade Physical Education Directors in the State Government colleges.

2. On 15th November 1999, the State Government issued an order revising the pay scale of Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Directors in the Government colleges. Under the said Government order, the benefit of the University Grants Commission (UGC) pay scales as revised from 1st January 1996 was granted to these three categories of employees with retrospective effect from 1st January 1996. On the same day, by a separate order, the benefit of the revised pay scale was granted to Teachers, Librarians and Directors of Education in the Government-aided colleges. The order dated 15th November 1999 was partially modified on 29th July 2000. A circular was issued by the Government of Karnataka on 23rd October 2001 stating that physical education and library personnel drawing UGC pay scales of 1996 shall not be granted other government benefits under the Government Order dated 15th November 1999.

3. The appellants were denied the benefit of the Government Order dated 15th November 1999. Therefore, the appellants filed an application before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, which was rejected. They filed a Writ Petition before the High Court to challenge the order of the Tribunal. Writ Petition was dismissed by the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment relies upon a Government Order dated 4th July 2008, which records that the revised UGC pay scale shall be extended from 27th July 1998 notionally and all financial benefits shall be extended prospectively from 4th July 2008, and no arrears shall be paid.

SUBMISSIONS

4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants pointed out that one Shri N. Ramesh, who retired as a Director of Physical Education (selection grade), was granted the benefit of the Government Order dated 15th November 1999. He superannuated on 28th February 2006. Later on, the benefits granted to the said employee were sought to be recovered from him, and therefore, he filed a Writ Petition before the High Court. The High Court held that the benefit of the revised UGC pay scale was rightly extended earlier to the said employee, and therefore, the High Court, by judgment and order dated 13th February 2009, directed that all benefits be extended to him. He pointed out that the Division Bench confirmed the said order in a Writ Appeal filed by the respondents, and a Special Leave Petition filed against the orders has been dismissed. Placing reliance on the documents annexed to the application for permission to file additional documents (I.A. No. 61474 of 2022), he submitted that even in 2014, full benefits under the Government Order dated 15th November 1999 were extended to similarly placed employees.

5. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State of Karnataka submitted that the orders passed in the Writ Petition filed by Shri N. Ramesh are per incuriam since the Government Order dated 4th July 2008 which incorporated the clarification issued on 19th October 2006 by UGC was not brought to the notice of the Courts. He pointed out that by a judgment and order dated 29th April 2011 passed by the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in Writ Appeal No. 234 of 2007 (State of Karnataka and Another vs. Puttaswamy and Others), the benefit of the Government Order dated 15th November 1999 was denied to the similarly placed employee on the basis of the order dated 19th October 2006 of


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top