Jharkhand High Court Order Setting Aside Pay-Parity Relief Is Restored; Supreme Court Directs Uniform Grant of Higher Pay Scale

A bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi heard an appeal challenging the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court which had set aside a Single Judge's direction to grant an employee parity in pay scale with similarly situated incumbents. The appeal arose from a dispute over removal of pay-scale anomalies for posts filled through a common recruitment process and concerned the application of earlier Patna High Court precedent and the effect of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000.

The Court allowed the appeal, held that the Patna High Court judgment in Nagendra Sahani was binding on the High Court of Jharkhand by virtue of Section 34(4) of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000, and found that the claim for pay parity constituted a continuing cause of action not barred by delay. The Court restored the Single Judge's order directing revision of the appellant’s pay scale and payment of arrears, and ordered compliance within three months. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “This deeming provision is of seminal importance to the present case. The judgment in Nagendra Sahani (supra), though rendered by the High Court at Patna on 22.09.1993 i.e., before the State re-organization, nonetheless, it must be treated by virtue of Section 34(4) as binding precedent of the High Court of Jharkhand.” The Court also reiterated that “the plea of delay and laches cannot be sustained in a case involving continuing violation of rights” and directed that the Single Judge’s directions be implemented, while awarding costs as per rules.

Background The dispute arose from recruitment conducted in 1981 for sixteen graduate-level Class-III posts, including Industries Extension Officer (IEO), by the Bihar State Subordinate Services Selection Board. Candidates were selected through a common competitive examination and were administratively allotted to various departments. After successive pay revisions an anomaly emerged: ten posts received a higher revised scale while six remained in a lower scale despite common recruitment. The Patna High Court in Nagendra Sahani (1993) held that there was “no reasonable nexus in fixing two revised scales of pay” for those posts and directed placement of all incumbents in the higher scale with retrospective effect; it added that “similarly situated persons need not approach the Court individually for the same relief.”

The appellant was appointed as IEO in 1992 in the lower scale and received adverse departmental replies to his representations in 2001–2004. He filed a writ petition in the Jharkhand High Court in 2005; the Single Judge allowed it in 2011, directing revision of pay scale from the date of appointment. The Division Bench, however, allowed the employer’s Letters Patent Appeal in 2022, setting aside the Single Judge’s order on grounds of alleged inordinate delay, unchallenged departmental rejection of representations and potential cascading financial effects. The employee appealed to this Court.

The Supreme Court examined Section 34 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000 and concluded that orders of the Patna High Court relating to the transferred territory were to be treated “for all purposes” as orders of the High Court of Jharkhand. The Court held that, given identical factual matrix and the binding nature of Nagendra Sahani, the Division Bench could not treat that decision as merely persuasive. On limitation, the Court relied on established precedent that claims for correct pay-fixation amounted to a continuing cause of action and found the writ petition timely since it followed rejection of departmental representations. The Court allowed the appeal, restored the Single Judge’s judgment, ordered compliance within three months and awarded costs.

Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 14046 of 2024 Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. S.S. Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Advocate