SANJAY KAROL, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
State of West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Confederation of State Government Employees, West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL J.
This judgment is divided into the following parts:
INDEX
| EXORDIUM |
| THE CONTROVERSY IN SUMMARIUM |
| A GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS |
| RoPA Rules |
| First Memorandum |
| PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL |
| BEFORE THE HIGH COURT-ROUND ONE |
| ON REMAND BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL |
| BEFORE THE HIGH COURT- ROUND TWO |
| RIVAL CONTENTIONS |
| A. Submissions on behalf of the Appellant-State |
| B. Submissions of the Respondents |
| QUESTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED |
| ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION |
| Dearness Allowance |
| Question 1: ARTICLE 309 |
| Questions 2, 3 and 4 |
| Question 5: ARBITRARINESS OF APPELLANT-STATE’S ACTION AND LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION OF ITS EMPLOYEES |
| Question 6 and 7: CONFLICT, IF ANY, BETWEEN LIST I AND II OF THE VIIth SCHEDULE AND FINANCIAL AUTONOMY OF THE STATE |
| Question 8: EFFECT OF FINDINGS IN FIRST ROUND OF LITIGATION |
| Question 9: WHETHER THE RESPONDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO DA TWICE A YEAR? |
| Question 10: DOES PAUCITY OF FUNDS DEFEAT A LEGAL RIGHT? |
| Question 11: FISCAL POLICY AND JUDICIAL REVIEW |
| Question 12: DEARNESS ALLOWANCE - A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT? |
| Question 13: DELAY AND LATCHES |
| DIRE |
Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi
Common Cause v. Union of India
Harakchand Ratanchand Banthia v. Union of India
Indian General Navigation and Railway Co. v. Workmen & Ors.
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. TNEB Thozhilalar Aykkiya Sangam
Mahatma Gandhi Mission v. Bhartiya Kamgar Sena, (2017) 4 SCC 449 [Paras 20
State of Madhya Pradesh v. C. Mandawar
Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Ltd v. Workmen and Anr.
Purushottam Lal and Ors v. Union of India & Anr.
Ajaya Kumar Das v. State of Orissa & Ors.
Ashok Ram Parhad v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 18 SCC 768 [Paras 20
Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tube Wells Corporation v. GS Uppal, (2008) 7 SCC 375 [Para 20
State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr v. Dinavahi Lakshmi Kameswari
Hindustan Times Ltd v. Workmen
Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. v. Workmen
Bengal Chemical & Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Workmen
B.N. Nagarajan v. State of Mysore
R.N. Nanjundappa v. T. Thimmiah
C. Sankaranarayanan v. State of Kerala
State of Assam v. Basanta Kumar Das
S.L. Sachdev v. Union of India
Distt. Registrar v. M.B. Koyakutty
Baleshwar Dass v. State of U.P.
Accountant-General v. S. Doraiswamy
Lila Dhar v. State of Rajasthan
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. v. Rabindranath Choubey
G.P Mathur J., in Rakesh Vij v. Raminder Pal Singh Sethi (Dr.)
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Jainul Islam
Girnar Traders (3) v. State of Maharashtra
State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi
Shayara Bano v. Union of India
Assn. for Democratic Reforms (Electoral Bond Scheme) v. Union of India
Sivanandan C T v. High Court of Kerala
Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation
Ram Pravesh Singh v. State of Bihar
Jitendra Kumar v. State of Haryana
Punjab State Coop. Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. v. Coop. Societies, (2022) 4 SCC 363 [Para 40
State of Jharkhand v. Brahmputra Metallics
Navjyoti Coop. Group Housing Society v. Union of India
Food Corporation of India v. Kamdhenu Cattle Feed Industries
Union of India v. H.S. Dhillon
State of U.P. v. Lalta Prasad Vaish
Kunhayammed & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
State of H.P. v. H.P. State Recognised & Aided Schools
State of A.P. v. Dinavahi Lakshmi Kameswari
Bhupendra Nath Hazarika v. State of Assam
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
BALCO Employees' Union v. Union of India
State of T.N. v. National South Indian River Interlinking Agriculturist Assn.
The court affirmed that the right to receive Dearness Allowance is legally enforceable under Article 21, linking it to human dignity, and rejected the State's financial incapacity as a valid defense ....
The court affirmed that dearness allowance for pensioners is a statutory right under Rule 20A and cannot be altered by administrative orders, emphasizing the finality of judicial decisions.
Differential rates of dearness allowance and relief for serving employees and pensioners are discriminatory and violate Article 14 of the Constitution as both are similarly affected by inflation.
Point of law: The phrase “equality before the law” contains declaration of equality of civil rights of all persons within territories of India.
Point of law: Affirmative action to make the remedy effective is of the essence of the right which otherwise becomes sterile. A responsible municipal council constituted for the precise purpose of pr....
Industrial dispute - If the employer is an instrumentality of the State, as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India, then they are bound to conform fully to the rigour discipline of the mandate c....
(1) Grant of benefits of higher pay scale to Central/State Government employees stand on different footing than grant of pay scale by an instrumentality of State.(2) Classification on the basis of qu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.