Allahabad High Court
PAWAN VERMA AND 43 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court held that the petition is barred by the earlier decision and directed the competent authority to adjudicate each petitioner’s claim individually in accordance with the statutory provisions and the observations in Seema Ray et al.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of 44 government employees, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to grant them the first salary increment on 1 January 2017, subsequent annual increments, and payment of arrears with interest, relying on the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, a Government Order dated 22‑12‑2016, and a Finance Controller letter dated 20‑11‑2025. The Court observed that the matter had already been decided in Seema Ray & 3 Others v. State of U.P. & 5 Others (Writ A No. 481 of 2026). Accordingly, the petition was dismissed, but the Court directed the competent authority to consider each petitioner’s individual representation, taking into account their dates of appointment, joining, and any delay in joining, and to pass a reasoned order within six weeks. The direction aligns with the earlier judgment’s observations and the applicable statutory provisions.
Issues considered
- What entitlement, if any, do the petitioners have to the first salary increment and subsequent annual increments under the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 and the relevant Government Order?
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to arrears of salary with interest for the period since the first increment.
- Whether the present petition is barred by the earlier decision in Seema Ray et al. v. State of U.P.
Legislation cited
- Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 10(1) Illustration (b)
- Finance Controller Letter dated 20.11.2025
- Government Order dated 22.12.2016
Subjects
- salary increment
- government service
- mandamus
- CCS Revised Pay Rules
- arrears of salary
- individual representations
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15308 of 2026
Pawan Verma And 43 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Manvendra Singh
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for
the State as well as Mr. Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for respondent
nos.2 to 4.
2. The petitioners, who are 44 in number, have approached this Court
with the following prayers:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents to grant first increment of salary to the petitioners on 1st January, 2017
and further annual increments on 1st January of each year and to revise their salaries
accordingly and to pay the revised salaries to the petitioners, in accordance with Rul
10(1) Illustration (b) of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, Clause 8 Illustration
(kha) of the Government Order dated 22.12.2016 and letter of the Finance Controller
dated 20.11.2025.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents to pay the arrears of salaries to the petitioners on account of grant of first
increment on 1st January, 2017 and revision of salary with interest as may be specified
by this Honble Court.
............"
3. The issue in question has already been decided by this Court in Writ A
No.481 of 2026, (Seema Ray and 3 Others vs. State of UP and 5
Others), decided on 24.08.2026.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the
WRIA No. 15308 of 2026
2
competent authority to consider and decide the individual representations,
if any, submitted by the petitioners, specifically indicating their respective
dates of appointment, dates of joining, and the circumstances in which
they could not join on the first day of the relevant month. Upon receipt of
such representations, the competent authority shall examine the claim of
each petitioner in the light of the statutory provisions, the applicable
Government Orders and the observations made by this Court in Seema
Ray (supra), and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order, dealing with
the individual claim of each petitioner, within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of such representation.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
September 23, 2026
K.N.
Digitally signed by :-
KALP NATH SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…