Authority: High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur

Order Date: 06.07.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant – Rakesh Verma, S/o Shri Kishor Verma, aged about 65, residing in Bilaspur. Respondents – (1) Municipal Corporation Bilaspur (through Commissioner), (2) Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (CIDC) (through Managing Director), (3) Divisional Manager CIDC, (4) State of Chhattisgarh (through Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development).
  • Counsel: For appellant – Mr. K.P.S. Gandhi; for respondents No.1‑3 – Mr. A.S. Kachhawaha; for respondent No.4 – Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, Deputy Advocate General.
  • Background: The appellant was appointed as a Conductor in 1978 in the erstwhile Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. His services were later absorbed by CIDC. By orders dated 04.08.2005 and 24.08.2005, he was deputed to Municipal Corporation Bilaspur as Assistant Grade‑III and subsequently absorbed there.
  • Claim: The appellant relied on a circular dated 01.08.2007 issued by the Government of Chhattisgarh, Home (Transport) Department, which granted him the benefit of the Chhattisgarh Revision of Pay Rules, 1998, effective from 01.08.2007. He contended that he was entitled to the benefit of the 5th Pay Scale from 01.04.1999 (the date the Rules became operative) and sought arrears for the period 01.04.1999 to July 2007 with interest at 18% per annum.
  • Procedural History: The appellant filed WPS No.3006/2019 before the learned Single Judge, which was dismissed on 23.02.2026. He then preferred the present intra‑Court appeal (WA No.546 of 2026).
  • Supporting Documents: Leave encashment of 240 days granted by letters dated 26.10.2017 and 27.10.2017, read with a State Government letter dated 23.10.2017, acknowledging 39 years of continuous service. The Municipal Corporation rejected his claim on 17.01.2019, relying on the 01.08.2007 circular.
  • Arguments – Appellant: Counsel argued that the Single Judge erred by not appreciating settled principles on revised pay scales, that the respondents’ acknowledgment of continuous service for retirement benefits should extend to pay revision benefits, that the circular could not override statutory rights, and that denial of arrears violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
  • Arguments – Respondents: State counsel maintained that the appellant was entitled to the revised pay rules only from 01.08.2007 as per the circular, because prior to his absorption he was not serving under the State Government in a capacity that attracted the 1998 Rules.
  • Court’s Reasoning: The Court examined the circular, the rejection order of 17.01.2019, and the lack of any substantive challenge to the circular’s legality. It held that recognition of service for leave encashment does not automatically confer entitlement to earlier pay‑scale benefits. The Court emphasized that different service benefits are governed by distinct rules and that the appellant had not demonstrated that the circular was ultra‑vires or arbitrary. The Court also found no merit in the Article 14 argument, noting the absence of evidence that similarly situated employees received the benefit from 01.04.1999.
  • Conclusion: The Court affirmed the Single Judge’s finding that the appellant’s entitlement to the Chhattisgarh Revision of Pay Rules, 1998, is limited to the period from 01.08.2007 onward, as per the circular. The appellant’s claim for arrears from 01.04.1999 to 31.07.2007 was rejected.

Final Outcome

  • The writ appeal is dismissed as devoid of merit. No order as to costs.

Topics: Service Pay Revision, Court Decision