Allowed

Karan Singh and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC8 Apr 2024WPS/1516/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenging denial of pay revision arrears for Special Task Force personnel. Court held that under Rule 14 of the 2009 Pay Rules, arrears must include the 50% Risk Allowance. Allowed petition and directed State to calculate and pay arrears within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; State directed to calculate arrears for STF personnel including Risk Factor and pay within three months from receipt of order copy.

Karan Singh and Ors. Vs State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶2

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1516 of 2014

¶5

Karan Singh, S/o Shri Lalju Prasad Aged About 50 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶6

Ishbiyu Minj S/o Shri Jokriyus Minj Aged About 41 Years Presently Posted As Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶7

Dayaveer Singh S/o Shri Ayodhya Singh Aged About 46 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶8

P.D.Ashok S/o Shri K.K.Diwakaran, Aged About 54 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Sub Inspector, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Albiyunis Toppo S/o Shri Alekshiyus Toppo Aged About 32 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Santosh Jhariya S/o Shri Ratan Lal Aged About 44 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶11

Narendra Yadav S/o Shri Kripal Singh Yadav Aged About 43 Years Presently Posted As Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶12

Pradeep Patel S/o Shri Benu Kumar Patel Aged About 38 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶13

Mukesh Singh S/o Shri Satyananrayan Singh Aged About 33 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶14

10.Brajesh Chandraker S/o Shri Ramsevak Chandraker Aged About 38 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶15

11.Alok Tiwari S/o Shri M.L. Tiwari, Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶16

12.Chineshwar Netam S/o Shri Umendi Netam Aged About 38 Years

¶17

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶18

¶19

Presently Posted As Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶20

13.Lakshmikant Chandraker S/o Late Shri Prem Lal Aged About 36 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶21

14.Satyendra Tiwari S/o Shri Shivanand Tiwari Aged About 36 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Platoon Commander, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶22

15.Dinesh Patel S/o Shri Ramkishore Patel Aged About 34 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable, Special Task Force, Baghera, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶23

16.Dharmendra Singh Bais S/o Late Shri Banshraj Singh Aged About 42 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander, 16th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh

¶24

17.Kunjram Chauhan S/o Late Shri D.P.Chauhan Aged About 42 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander 6th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶25

18.Chaitram Baghel S/o Late Shri Prahlad Baghel Aged About 47 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Platoon Commander, 14th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Dalli Rajhara, Camp Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶26

19.Dileep Kumar Daharia S/o Shri Banshilal Daharia, Aged About 37 Years Presently Posted As Company Commander, 2nd Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Sakri, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶27

20.Hiran Kumar Gendle S/o Late Shri Khelan Das Gendle Aged About 32 Years Presently Posted As Head Constable 2nd Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Sakri, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶28

---- Petitioners

¶29

Versus

¶30

State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Home Police Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶31

Secretary, Department Of Finance And Planning, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶32

Director General Of Police Police Head Quarters, Civil Line, Raipur,

¶33

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶34

¶35

District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶36

Additional Director General Of Police Chhattisgarh Armed Forces, Police Head Quarters, Civil Line, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶37

---- Respondents

¶38

For Petitioners	:	Shri Amrito Das, Advocate
For Respondents/State	:	Shri Abhishek Singh, Panel Lawyer

¶39

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

Order on Board

09/04/2024

Heard.

By way of the present petition, the petitioners are challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 14/05/2012 whereby the consequential benefits on pay revision with retrospective effect have been denied.

¶44

The present petition is by the group of persons, who were working at the relevant time under the Special Task Force (STF), who were to be deployed in the Naxal infested areas.

¶45

By order dated 30/12/2005, the persons, who were placed in STF, were granted 50% of their Basic Pay as Risk Allowance. The extract of the order dated 30/12/2005 (Annexure P/2) is reproduced hereunder:-

¶46

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶47

¶48

NRrhlx<+ 'kklu x`g ¼iqfyl½ foHkkx nkÅ dY;k.k flag Hkou] jk;iqj ea=ky;

¶49

Øekad ,Q&3&9@x`g&nks@05 jk;iqj] fnukad 30@12@2005

¶50

izfr]

¶51

iqfyl egkfuns’kd iqfyl eq[;ky; N0x0 jk;iqj

¶52

fo"k;%&,l0Vh0,Q0 gsrq Lohdr inksa esa of) tksf[ke HkRrk izLrkoA lanHkZ%&iqfyl eq[;ky; dk i= Øekad iq0eq0@[k.M&9@;kstuk@2009@05 fnukad 26-11-2005

¶53

&&&00&&&

¶54

jkT; ,rn~ }kjk N0x0 l’kL= cy ds fofHkUu okfgfu;ksa ds iwoZ esa Lohdr 165 inksa ds vfrfjDr 335 inksa dks lfEefyr dj dqy 500 iqfyl vf/kdkfj;ksa ,oa deZpkfj;ksa dks ,l0Vh0,Q0 HkRrk fnukad 01-01-2006 ls ewy osru dk 50 izfr’kr jkf’k tksf[ke HkRrk ds :i esa iznku djus dh Lohdfr iznku djrk gSA

¶55

Øekad	in uke	la[;k	osrueku	,l0Vh0,Q0 HkRrk
1-	daiuh dekaMj	05	5500&9000	ewy osru dk 50%
2-	ih0lh0	15	4500&7000	&&&@@&&&
3-	iz/kku vkj{kd	95	3500&5200	&&&@@&&&
4-	vkj{kd	385	3050&4590	&&&@@&&&
	;ksx	500

¶56

2& mDr O;; ekax la[;k 03&eq[; 'kh"kZ 2055&104 fo’ks"k iqfyl 4492&lkekU; O;; ds varxZr fodyuh; gksxkA

¶57

3& ;g Lohd`fr foRr foHkkx ds ;w0vks0@vkj0u0 292@2055@c&1@pkj fnukad 15-12-05 ds }kjk nh xbZ lgefr ds vk/kkj ij tkjh dh xbZ gSA

¶58

NRrhlx<+ ds jkT;iky ds uke ls rFkk vkns’kkuqlkj lgh@& voj lfpo N-x-’kklu x`g foHkkx

¶59

The contention of the petitioners is that subsequently in exercise of

¶60

power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India,

¶61

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶62

¶63

Hon’ble the Governor of Chhattisgarh promulgated the Chhattisgarh Revision of Pay Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 2009’) that was published on 23^rd of March, 2009, however, they were given retrospective effect from 1^st of January, 2006. The petitioners contend that as per Rule 14 of the Rules, 2009 the mode of calculation of arrears of pay has been defined, which would show that the basic pay and allowances were to be included to calculate the arrears. Meaning thereby the earlier basic pay and the benefit which would have accrued as per Rules, 2009 by deduction of the two scales, the arrears would be calculated, however, the claim of the petitioners for arrears was denied by order dated 14/05/2012 (Annexure P/1).

¶64

The petitioners further contend that in respect of the Special Intelligence Branch, in order to calculate the arrears, the allowance has also been taken into account which would be evident from Annexure P/6, therefore, the petitioners till the date they were posted in the Special Task Force, the arrears accordingly be paid to them by taking into account the special allowance of risk factors to the extent of 50% of the basic pay. It is further stated that the discriminatory treatment could not be allowed as one branch of SIB has been given the same benefit but the petitioner group has been denied.

¶65

The contention of the State is that the State Government since has never issued any order granting the arrears of salary of 50% from 01/01/2006 as per the pay revision rules, the petitioners could not claim the same.

¶66

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶67

¶68

The document Annexure R/1 has been produced which shows that certain benefits have been given to SIB.

¶69

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶70

As per Annexure P/2, which is reproduced hereinbefore, the petitioners, who were said to be in the Special Task Force were given 50% allowance of their basic pay with effect from 01/01/2006, the Government of Chhattisgarh in exercise of power conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Government has promulgated the Rules. The Rules were styled as Chhattisgarh Pay Revision Rules, 2009. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 1 purports that it shall be deemed to have come into force from 1^st day of January, 2006, the said rule is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶71

1. Short title and commencement -

¶72

(1) These rules may be called The Chhattisgarh Revision of Pay Rules, 2009.

¶73

(2) They shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1^st day of January, 2006.

¶74

Rule 14 further prescribed the mode of arrears of pay along with explanation, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶75

14. Mode of payment of arrear of pay- The arrear for the relevant period shall be paid in cash in three installments, in the following manner-

¶76

(i) Year 2009-10 -From January, 2006 to October, 2006 (ii)Year 2010-11 -From November, 2006 to August, 2007 (iii) Year 2011-12 -From September, 2007 to August, 2008 Explanation- For the purpose of this rule:

¶77

(a) “arrear of pay” in relation to a Government servant,

¶78

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶79

¶80

means the difference between:

¶81

(i) the aggregate of the pay and allowances to which he is entitled on account of revision of his pay and allowances under these rules, for the relevant period; and

¶82

(ii) the aggregate of the pay and allowances to which he would have been entitled (whether such pay and allowances have been received or not) for that period had his pay and allowances not been so revised.

¶83

(b) “relevant period” means the period commencing on the 1^st day of January, 2006 and ending with the 31^st August 2008.

¶84

Reading of the explanation above would show that in order to arrive at a particular quantum of arrears, the salary and allowance which would have been paid by such revision and actually which has been paid would be deducted and the relevant period also has been reckoned from 1^st of January, 2006.

¶85

The grievance of the petitioners is that though the pay revision Rules takes into sweep the allowance but by the subsequent pay revision, the allowance has not been taken into account. The plain reading of the Rules 1 & 14 of the Rules, 2009 would show that particular mode has been provided wherein the allowance has not been made foreign. Consequently, in order to ascertain the arrears Rule 14 of the Rules, 2009 as has been prescribed would be in operation which would include the basic pay plus allowance which includes the Risk Factor pay. No justification, therefore, can be attached to non-grant of such arrears.

¶86

WPS No.1516 of 2014 Karan Singh & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶87

¶88

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the State is directed to calculate the arrears in respect of every individual who are posted in STF till the date they were posted/entitled and calculate the arrears by taking into account the addition of Risk Factor which would also form part of the revised pay. The same exercise may be carried out within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶89

Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

¶90

SD/-SD/- SD/Goutam Bhaduri Judge

¶91

Ashu

Karan Singh and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Singh and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indal Singh Sidar Vs The State Of ChhattisgaRH and Ors.

Kadir Ansari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt.alika Pandey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Kamlesh Singh

Anirudha Banjari Vs Vivekanand Bhivgade

Smt. Chandrika Bai Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.