Compliance with Supreme Court judgments is crucial in determining entitlement to Duty Call-up Allowance for Home Guards.

JUDGMENT

M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in W.A. No.319 of 2020, the original writ petitioners working as Home Guards and the State of Orissa both have preferred the present appeals.

2. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No.3906 of 2022 has been filed by the State of Orissa and others challenging the order passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in W.P. (C) No.19556 of 2020 by which the High Court has disposed of the said writ petition in terms of the judgment and order passed in W.A. No.319 of 2020 which is the subject matter of C.A.No.8836 of 2022. Therefore, C.A. No.8836 of 2022 arising out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in W.A. No.319 of 2020 is treated as lead matter and the facts arising out of the said W.A.No.319 of 2020 are narrated, which are as under:-

2.1 That the original writ petitioners all are/were working as Home Guards for more than 10 to 15 years under the Home Department of the State of Orissa. After rendering 10 to 15 years of service, they filed the writ petition before the learned Single Judge for a direction to the State to disburse their salary as per the direction of this Court in the case of Grah Rakshak, Home Guards Welfare Association v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others reported in (2015) 6 SCC 247 and the subsequent order/clarificatory order dated 04.05.2016 passed in Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 699-700 of 2015, by which this Court clarified its earlier order. A relief was also sought to give them benefit of 7th Pay Commission from the date the same had been given to their counterparts of the other States. The learned Single Judge following the decision of this Court in the case of Grah Rakshak (supra) allowed the said writ petition directing the State Government to implement the recommendations of the Director General (Fire Service, Home Guards, Civil Defense), Orissa in respect of the Home Guards in the State of Orissa as per the decision of this Court in the case of Grah Rakshak (supra). The learned Single Judge also directed the State to take into account the increase in the pay of the Constables on application of the 7th Pay Commission’s report. That it is required to be noted that earlier the Director General of Police, Orissa, recommended payment at the minimum sum of Rs.533/- per day taking into consideration the remuneration available to the Constables in the State in the lowest rank in the Police personnel since 10.11.2016. Therefore, the learned Single Judge while granting one month time to the State Government to implement the said recommendation directed that the Home Guards in the State of Orissa pending decision under final fitment be paid provisionally at the minimum Rs.500/- from January, 2020, subject to the final decision of the Government of Orissa on implementation of the recommendation of the Director General.

2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.8148 of 2020, the State of Orissa and others preferred W.A. No. 319 of 2020. By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court by and large affirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, The High Court restricted the payment at the rate of Rs.533/- per day to the Home Guards from January, 2020, instead of 10.11.2016, as directed by the learned Single Judge.

2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in W.A.No.319 of 2020, the original writ petitioners – Home Guards as well as the State of Orissa have preferred the present appeals.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Orissa has vehemently submitted that the High Court has materially erred in directing the Sta