Absorbed Panchayat teachers are ineligible for Kramonnati pay benefits restricted to regular School Education Department employees.

The petitioners were initially appointed as Assistant Teachers and Teachers by Janpad Panchayats under the Panchayat Department

Following a State Government policy decision dated June 30, 2018, the petitioners were absorbed into the School Education Department

The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking a writ of mandamus to quash the respondent’s orders and direct the authorities to grant them the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanmaan (career progression pay) upon the completion of 10 years of service

They relied upon a State circular dated March 10, 2017, and the Division Bench judgment in Smt. Sona Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Whether teachers originally appointed under the Panchayat Department and later absorbed into the School Education Department are entitled to the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman under the circular dated March 10, 2017

State Government Circular dated March 10, 2017, regarding eligibility for Kramonnati

principles established in WPS No. 11009 of 2025 (decided on November 24, 2025), which determined that employees governed by the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, are distinct from regular employees of the School Education Department

The court found that prior to their absorption under the policy dated June 30, 2018, the petitioners were "shikshakarmis" (Assistant Teachers-Panchayat) governed by separate rules under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993

Although their designations were similar to department teachers, they were not considered employees of the School Education Department during the period for which they claimed the benefit

The court noted that because the petitioners did not fulfill the criteria stipulated in the March 10, 2017, circular—specifically the requirement of being departmental teachers—they were ineligible for the relief sought

The court followed the coordinate bench's reasoning in WPS No. 11009 of 2025, which dismissed identical claims on the ground that service rendered under the Panchayat Department cannot be equated with service in the School Education Department for the purposes of the 2017 circular

It held that the petitioners are not entitled to Kramonnati Vetanman as they did not meet the criteria of the March 10, 2017, circular during their tenure under the Panchayat Department

No relief regarding arrears of pay or interest was granted.