The government has the right to fix cut-off dates for salary increments based on financial constraints, and such decisions are typically upheld unless deemed arbitrary.

C O M M O N O R D E R

(Order of this Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.)

The order of recovery to recover the excess salary paid to the writ petitioners are sought to be quashed in the present writ proceedings.

2. The petitioners are working as Senior Bailiff/Junior Bailiff/Masalchi/Night Watchman in the Judicial Department. All the petitioners were admittedly appointed beyond the cut off date fixed for grant of one increment i.e., from 01.04.2003 to 31.12.2005. In other words, the petitioners were appointed after 31.12.2005.

3. In Government Letter dated 29.03.2012, Clarification No.1 stipulates that “the benefit of one increment granted to the individuals is applicable to those appointed between 01.04.2003 to 31.12.2005. Fixing of cut off date has been recognised by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in financial matters and the ratio laid down regarding cut off date by the Apex Court are as follows:

3.1 In the case of Mohammad Ali Imam and others Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2020) 5 Supreme Court Cases 685 held as follows:

“.On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents have pointed out that much water flowed after that judgment and inter alia, invited our attention to the judgment in State of W.B. V. Ratan Behari Dey (referred to in the impugned judgment itself) opining that it is open to the State or the Corporation to change the conditions of service unilaterally, and terminal benefits as well as pensionary benefits constitute conditions of service. Thus, the power to revise salaries and/or pay scales, as also terminal benefits/pensioners benefit can be made as a concomitant of that power so long as the date is specified in a reasonable manner.”

9. .....

10. .....

11.Apart from this, there may be other considerations in the mind of the executive authority while fixing a particular date i.e. economic conditions, financial constraints, administrative and other circumstances, and if no reason is forthcoming from the executive for fixation of a particular date, it should not be interfered with by the Court unless the cut-off date leads to some blatantly capricious or outrageous result. In such cases, it has been opined that there must be exercise of judicial restraint and such matters ought to be left to the executive authorities, to fix the cut-off date, and the Government thus, must be left with some leeway and free play at the joints in this connection. Even if no particular reasons are given for the cut-off date by the Government, the choice of cut-off date cannot be held to be arbitrary (unless, it is shown to be totally capricious or whimsical)-State of A.P. v.

N.Subbarayudu.

3.2 In the case of Government of Andhra Pradesh and others Vs.

N.Subbarayudu and Others reported in 2008 14 SCC 702, the Apex Court ruled as follows:

“5.In a catena of decisions of this Court it has been held that the cut-off date is fixed by the executive authority keeping in view the economic conditions, financial constraints and many other administrative and other attending circumstances. This Court is also of the view that fixing cut-off dates is within the domain of the executive authority and the court should not normally interfere with the fixation of cut-off date by the executive authority unless such order appears to be on the face of it blatantly discriminatory and arbitrary.

6. No doubt in D.S.Nakara V.Union of India this Court had struck down the cut-off date in connection with the demand of pension. However, in subsequent decisions this Court has considerably watered down the rigit view taken in Nakara case as observed in para 29 of the decision of this Court in State of Punjab V. Amar Nath Goyal.

7. There may be various consideration in the mind of the executive authorities due to which a particular cut-off date has been fixed. These considerations can be financial, administrative or other considerations. The court must exercise judicial restraint and must ordinarily leave it to the executive authorities to fix the cut-off date. The Gove