CIDC employees are entitled to revised pay scales and arrears from 1 January 2006 to 31 October 2011.

The 51 petitioners were employed by the Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (CIDC) on various posts. They challenged the State Government’s decision dated 02.03.2012, by which they were denied revision of pay scales and consequential salary benefits for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011.

At the hearing, the parties agreed that the issue had already been decided by the High Court in WPS No. 6064 of 2026, Santosh Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors., decided on 12.08.2026.

The Registry’s objection regarding non-filing of service-related documents was considered and overruled by the Court.

Whether the petitioners, being employees of CIDC, were entitled to the benefit of the revised pay scales and other salary revisions for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011, despite the State’s decision dated 02.03.2012?

Whether the petition could be disposed of in terms of the prior decision in WPS No. 6064 of 2026, which followed the judgment in WPS No. 697 of 2013 and connected matters?

The Court applied the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Bihar State Beverages Corporation Ltd. and Satya Brata Chowdhury, as relied upon in the earlier decision.

It also followed the High Court’s judgment dated 11.07.2024 in WPS No. 697 of 2013 and connected matters, which had been affirmed by the Division Bench in WA No. 622 of 2024 on 30.09.2024.

The governing rule was that, once the Circular/decision dated 02.03.2012 denying the revised pay benefits was quashed, eligible employees were entitled to the benefit of the Sixth Pay Commission and other salary revisions from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011, subject to verification and calculation of the arrears.

The Court found that the facts and legal issue in the present petition were identical to those decided in WPS No. 6064 of 2026.

Since that earlier decision had applied the binding effect of the judgment in WPS No. 697 of 2013 and connected matters, which had been affirmed in appeal, the Court held that there was no reason to take a different view.

Accordingly, the petitioners’ claim for revised pay benefits was governed by the prior ruling: the denial embodied in the decision dated 02.03.2012 could not defeat their entitlement, subject to verification of their individual claims and calculation of arrears.

Consequently, the petitioners were held entitled, subject to verification, to the benefit of the Sixth Pay Commission and other salary revisions for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011.

The State authorities were required to calculate and pay the verified arrears and decide the petitioners’ representations, preferably within 150 days from receipt of a copy of the order.