The court ruled that subsequent memoranda revised remuneration benefits, disregarding earlier cut-off service requirements, ensuring equal treatment for similarly situated employees.

JUDGMENT :

Sujoy Paul, J.

1. These intra court appeals are arising out of Judgment of Learned Single Judge passed in WPA No. 11914 of 2021 decided on 8th February, 2024. Thus, with the consent of parties, these matters were analogously heard and decided by this common Judgment. Parties were heard on the question of maintainability as well as on merits.

Factual Backgrounds:

2. The Writ Petitioners/Respondent herein (hereinafter called as ‘employees’) filed WPA No. 11914 of 2021 seeking benefit of revised pay and emoluments as per the memorandums issued by the State Government from time to time.

3. The Government issued first memorandum on 16th September, 2011 and made it clear in Clause (iv) that remuneration of casual/daily rated/contractual workers who had not yet complete 10 years of service will be equivalent to 75 per cent of remuneration subject to a minimum of Rs. 5,000/- per month.

4. In Clause (v), it is mentioned that such casual/daily rated/contractual workers who will complete 10 years service on 1^st July every year will come under the purview of this order provided no such worker if engaged after 1^st April, 2010 will come under the purview of this order

5. Another memorandum dated 25th February, 2016 was issued whereby the Government decided to revise the benefits as follows:

“(i) All contractual/casual/daily rated workers shall continue to be in engagement up to the age of 60 years. Engagement of contractual/casual/daily rated worker shall not be terminated except as prescribed in the above referred Memo.

(ii) Consolidated monthly remuneration of contractual/casual/daily rated workers will be as follows:

(Emphasis Supplied)”

6. Yet another memorandum dated 8th February, 2019 was issued whereby the consolidated remuneration was again revised. The relevant portions reads thus:

“Group-‘D’

Group-‘C’

(Emphasis Supplied)”

7. The employees in the instant case were admittedly engaged after 1st April, 2010. One such appointment order dated 19th June, 2018 is already placed on record. The bone of contention of employees before the writ court was that after having completed 5-10 years of service, they are entitled to get the revised benefits as per memorandum dated 25th February, 2016 and 8th February, 2019 respectively. The stand of the Government, on the other hand, was that by memorandum dated 25th February, 2016 and 8th February, 2019, only rates/consolidated pay have been revised. The conditions relating to eligibility/entitlement prescribed in the memorandum dated 16^th September, 2011 will remain intact.

8. The Learned Single Judge by impugned order opined that the memorandum dated 25th February, 2016 and 8th February, 2019 shows that the eligibility/impediment of completion of particular years of service on a cut of date has been given complete go by and therefore, the employees are entitled to get the benefit of revised remuneration on completion of stipulated years of service.

MAT 952 of 2024:

9. Admittedly, the State filed this MAT to assail the judgment passed on 8th February, 2024 in WPA 11914 of 2021. The said MAT was listed before the Division Bench and was withdrawn on 2nd January, 2025. Pertinently, while withdrawing the intra Court appeal, no liberty was prayed for or granted to seek review or file another intra Court appeal.

RVW 8 of 2025:

10. RVW 8 of 2025 was filed seeking review of Judgment passed in WPA 11914 of 2021. In the initial hearing of said review, a conditional interim order was granted to the State by directing them to deposit the amount of revised remuneration before the Registry of this Cour