The Bombay High Court has clarified the entitlement of tribal and PESA area employees to a one-step promotional pay scale under Government Resolution (G.R.) dated 29.02.2024, directing authorities to scrutinize eligibility within strict timelines. This judgment reinforces the principle that administrative benefits cannot be denied without individualized scrutiny, even where prior judicial orders have favored similarly situated employees.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, employees deployed in tribal and PESA (Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas)) areas under the Zilla Parishad, sought the benefit of a one-step promotional pay scale under G.R. dated 06.08.2002 and G.R. dated 29.02.2024. They claimed entitlement to arrears and current salary adjustments from the date of their appointment in these areas. The respondents, including the State of Maharashtra and Zilla Parishad authorities, resisted the claims, arguing that the 2002 G.R. was not applicable to Zilla Parishad employees and that a clarification dated 14.08.2008 excluded certain categories of employees.
Key Facts
- The petitioners are employees of Zilla Parishads or private institutions operating in tribal/PESA areas.
- G.R. dated 06.08.2002 introduced a one-step promotional pay scale for government servants in tribal areas.
- G.R. dated 29.02.2024 (issued by the General Administration Department) is the latest resolution governing the scheme.
- G.R. dated 14.08.2008 purportedly clarified the applicability of the 2002 G.R. to exclude certain employees.
- The petitioners relied on prior orders of the Bombay High Court, including Hiralal Jagannath Bawa and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (Writ Petition No. 8824 of 2021, dated 21.12.2021), which favored similarly situated employees.
Procedural History
- Multiple writ petitions were filed before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking enforcement of the one-step promotional pay scale:
- Writ Petition No. 1348 of 2026 (Prashant Nimbajirao Bagul & others)
- Writ Petition No. 1358 of 2026 (Sushma Manish Shah & others)
- Writ Petition Nos. 4885 to 4906 of 2026 (various petitioners)
- Writ Petition Nos. 261, 5244 to 5250 of 2026 (various petitioners)
- The petitions were heard together due to the commonality of issues.
- The State argued that the 2002 G.R. was not applicable to Zilla Parishad employees and that the 2008 clarification excluded private institution employees.
- The petitioners cited prior judicial orders, including Writ Petition No. 13842 of 2025, where the Court directed consideration of the 2024 G.R.
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought:
- Directions to the respondents to grant the benefit of the one-step promotional pay scale under G.R. dated 06.08.2002 and 29.02.2024 from the date of their appointment in tribal/PESA areas.
- Payment of salary arrears and current salary adjusted for the one-step pay scale.
- Compliance with the Court's directions within specified timelines.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether Zilla Parishad employees and private institution employees deployed in tribal/PESA areas are entitled to the one-step promotional pay scale under G.R. dated 06.08.2002 and 29.02.2024, and if so, whether the respondents could deny such benefits without individualized scrutiny of eligibility.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioners
- Relied on prior orders of the Bombay High Court, including Hiralal Jagannath Bawa and Writ Petition No. 13842 of 2025, which directed the respondents to consider the 2024 G.R. for similarly situated employees.
- Argued that the respondents were mechanically applying the 2008 clarification to deny benefits without scrutinizing individual cases.
- Contended that the 2024 G.R. superseded earlier resolutions and mandated consideration of all eligible employees.
For the Respondents
- Submitted that G.R. dated 06.08.2002 was applicable only to government servants and not to Zilla Parishad employees.
- Relied on G.R. dated 14.08.2008, which purportedly excluded private institution employees from the scheme.
- Argued that the petitioners' deployment in private institutions without schools in tribal/PESA areas disqualified them from the benefits.
- Contended that the Court's prior orders did not mandate automatic grant of benefits without scrutiny.
The Court's Analysis
The Court observed that while prior orders had favored similarly situated employees, no direction was ever issued to grant benefits without scrutiny. The respondents were required to verify eligibility under the relevant Government Resolutions, particularly G.R. dated 29.02.2024, which was the latest and most comprehensive resolution on the matter.
"Only after those persons are found eligible then only the action as contemplated under the Government Resolution was required to be undertaken. Therefore, in our opinion, all the instructions are very much clear which require no deviation."
The Court emphasized that the respondents must scrutinize each petitioner's record to determine eligibility, rather than denying benefits outright based on the 2008 clarification. The Court also noted that the 2024 G.R. would inherently consider the 2008 clarification, ensuring a balanced approach.
The Verdict
The writ petitions were allowed in part with the following directions:
- The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, shall scrutinize the records of the petitioners and their deployment locations within 30 days from the date of the judgment (08.05.2026).
- For cases found eligible after verification, the respondents shall clear the claims and pay the petitioners:
- The one-step promotional pay scale benefits.
- Arrears and current salary adjustments within 30 days of clearance.
- For cases found ineligible, the respondents shall issue notice to the petitioners, allowing them to appear and address the authority within 120 days.
- After the hearing, the respondents shall pass an appropriate order granting benefits to eligible petitioners.
- Petitioners aggrieved by adverse orders may avail statutory remedies under the G.R. dated 29.02.2024 or other relevant resolutions.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Scrutiny Is Mandatory Before Denial of Benefits
- Authorities cannot deny benefits under G.R. dated 29.02.2024 or earlier resolutions without individualized scrutiny of eligibility.
- Employees deployed in tribal/PESA areas must be given an opportunity to present their case before adverse orders are passed.
Prior Judicial Orders Do Not Guarantee Automatic Entitlement
- While prior orders of the Bombay High Court have favored similarly situated employees, each case must be scrutinized under the latest Government Resolution.
- Petitioners cannot rely solely on judicial precedents; they must demonstrate eligibility under the applicable G.R.
Timelines for Compliance Are Strict
- Authorities must complete scrutiny within 30 days and disburse arrears/salary adjustments within 30 days of clearance.
- Hearings for ineligible cases must be completed within 120 days, ensuring timely resolution of disputes.
