1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5544 of 2023 1 - Sanjeevan Tirkey S/o Late Rafel Tirkey Aged About 61 Years R/o - Kanker, District- North Baster Kanker, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Woman And Child Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - District Program Officer Woman And Child Welfare Department, Kanker, District- North Baster Kanker, C.G. 4 - Divisional Joint Director Tresury, Accounts And Pension, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 5 - Joint Director Tresury, Accounts And Pension, Ghadi Chowk, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. Advocate General assisted by Mr. Anway Tiwari, Panel Lawyer Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/01/2026 1. The present writ petition is being filed seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set aside the impugned order dated 14.07.2023 passed by the respondent no 4 placed as ANNEXURE P/1. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant Time Bound Pay Scale to the petitioner from the date on which the petitioner became eligible for the same i.e. from 12.11.2008 with interest @ 12% per Annum from 12.11.2008 till the actual payment is made to the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief (s) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the interest of Justice.” 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Grade-I on 07.11.1998 and has been continuously serving the Government since then. The petitioner has thus completed more than 25 years of unblemished service. The petitioner is not challenging any specific appointment or disciplinary order, but is aggrieved by the illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and indifferent action of the respondent authorities in not granting time-bound pay scales. Despite completing the requisite period of service, the petitioner has not been granted the first time-bound pay scale due on 12.11.2008 and the second time- bound pay scale due on 12.11.2018, to which the petitioner is 3 legally entitled. As per the petitioner’s service book and the decision taken in the departmental committee meeting held on 21.10.2022, the department itself recommended the grant of time- bound pay scale to the petitioner. Certain objections were raised by the office of the Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Accounts and Pension, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur on 30.12.2022; however, the said objections were duly rectified by the Department vide letter dated 16.01.2023. Despite satisfactory compliance and clarification by the Department, the treasury authorities again raised the same objections on 27.01.2023, which action is arbitrary, unjustified and unsustainable in law. The respondent authorities are deliberately delaying the grant of time-bound pay scale to the petitioner, though it became due as early as 12.11.2008. Hence, the petitioner seeks a direction for grant of the time-bound pay scale along with interest @ 12% per annum from 12.11.2008 till the date of actual payment. Earlier, the petitioner filed WPS No. 2544/2023 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.04.2023 directing the petitioner to file a representation, to be decided by respondent No. 4 within 45 days in light of the order dated 13.12.2022. However, respondent No. 4, in a most illegal, arbitrary and mala fide manner, ignoring the order dated 13.12.2022 passed by the Collector (Women and Child Development), District North Bastar Kanker, passed the impugned order dated 14.07.2023 holding that only directly 4 appointed employees are entitled to time-bound pay scale and thereby rejected the petitioner’s claim. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 14.07.2023 is illegal, arbitrary and mala fide, and as such, the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. It is further submitted that the action of the respondent authorities is wholly arbitrary, unreasonable and mala fide, and is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, rendering the impugned action unsustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel contends that the failure of the respondent authorities to grant and release the Time Bound Pay Scale to the petitioner, despite his clear eligibility with effect from 12.11.2008, is ex facie illegal and bad in law. It is also submitted that the respondent authorities failed to appreciate that the Department itself had already passed an order recommending and granting the Time Bound Pay Scale to the petitioner, and therefore the same ought to have been implemented and paid without any further delay. Learned counsel submits that non-payment of the Time Bound Pay Scale has caused serious financial loss and prejudice to the petitioner, despite there being no fault or lapse on his part. It is further submitted that there is no adverse entry or remark against the petitioner at any point of time, and therefore the petitioner is fully fit and eligible for grant of the Time Bound Pay Scale with effect from 12.11.2008. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is entitled to the Time Bound Pay Scale in terms of the 5 notifications, circulars and governing rules issued by the State Government. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has rendered long and continuous service to the Government and is now on the verge of retirement; hence, the respondent authorities be directed to immediately release the arrears of the Time Bound Pay Scale along with consequential benefits. 4. Learned State counsel, opposing the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality, arbitrariness or mala fides and has been passed strictly in accordance with the governing rules and instructions. It is contended that the writ petition is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed. It is submitted that the petitioner is presently working as Assistant Grade-I in the office of the District Programme Officer, Women and Child Development, Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.). The petitioner’s service book was submitted for verification before the office of the deponent and, upon due verification, it was found that the petitioner was initially working as Assistant Projector in the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) at Indore (M.P.). After abolition of the ODA, the petitioner’s services were absorbed under the Women and Child Development Department as Assistant Grade-I. Learned State counsel submits that the post of Assistant Grade-I is a promotional post and not a post of direct recruitment. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s case was not forwarded in accordance with Finance Instruction No. 11/2008 issued by the 6 Finance and Planning Department, Government of Chhattisgarh. It is further submitted that as per Schedule-II appended to Finance Instruction No. 11/2008, department-wise time pay scales have been prescribed and the qualifying period for grant of the first Kramonnati/time pay scale is completion of 10 years of service from the date of first appointment and for the second Kramonnati/time pay scale is completion of 20 years of service from the date of first appointment. In the present case, the petitioner was initially working under the ODA and her services were absorbed in the Women and Child Development Department on the post of Assistant Grade-I in the year 1998. Learned State counsel further submits that the benefit of Kramonnati/time pay scale is extended to Government servants strictly in terms of Finance Instruction No. 11/2008 dated 28.04.2008. Since the petitioner was absorbed on a promotional post, it is not permissible under the said instructions to determine or grant Kramonnati/time pay scale in her case. It is lastly submitted that there is no provision under Finance Instruction No. 11/2008 to grant Kramonnati/time pay scale to employees who are directly absorbed on a promotional post. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed, and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the documents enclosed along with the petition. 7 6. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashment of the impugned order dated 14.07.2023 passed by respondent No. 4 and for a direction to grant Time Bound Pay Scale to the petitioner with effect from 12.11.2008 along with interest. 7. The undisputed facts reveal that the petitioner was absorbed on the post of Assistant Grade-I vide order dated 17.11.1998. After such absorption, the petitioner successfully completed the period of probation and was thereafter granted regular pay scale, treating him as a regular employee of the Department. 8. From the service record, it is evident that all service benefits applicable to regular employees, including fixation of pay equivalent to regular employees, were extended to the petitioner from the date of joining and thereafter vide departmental committee meeting held on 21.10.2022, it further appears from the record that the department itself, after due consideration, held the petitioner entitled for grant of Time Bound Pay Scale and, in that regard, recommendations were made and necessary correspondence was issued. The service book entries and departmental committee proceedings clearly reflect that the petitioner was treated at par with regular employees for the purpose of service benefits, including consideration for Time Bound Pay Scale. 9. In view of the aforesaid factual position, the argument advanced by the learned State counsel that the petitioner was not a regular 8 employee and, therefore, not entitled to Time Bound Pay Scale, is found to be misconceived and contrary to the record. Once the petitioner was absorbed, his probation was completed, regular pay scale was granted, and all consequential service benefits were extended, the respondents cannot deny the benefit of Time Bound Pay Scale by treating him differently. The impugned order dated 14.07.2023 proceeds on an erroneous assumption that only directly recruited employees are entitled to Time Bound Pay Scale. Such reasoning overlooks the fact that the petitioner, after absorption, stood regularised in service and was granted parity with regular employees in all respects. The said order, therefore, suffers from arbitrariness and non-application of mind and cannot be sustained. 10. Considering the long and continuous service rendered by the petitioner, the departmental recommendations already made in his favour, and the settled position that similarly situated employees have been granted Time Bound Pay Scale, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. 11. The respondents are directed to grant the Time Bound Pay Scale to the petitioner with effect from the date he became eligible, i.e. 12.11.2008, and to release all consequential arrears in accordance with law, within a reasonable period from the date of receipt of this order. 9 12. The impugned order dated 14.07.2023 (Annexure P/1) is hereby quashed and set aside. The petition stands allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna JUDGE