CIDC employees are entitled to Sixth Pay Commission benefits and salary revisions from 1 January 2006 to 31 October 2011.

The 42 petitioners were employees working in various posts under the Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (CIDC).

They challenged the State of Chhattisgarh’s decision/circular dated 02.03.2012, by which they were denied the benefit of pay-scale revision for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011, including the benefits arising from the Sixth Pay Commission.

At the preliminary stage, the Registry had raised an objection regarding non-filing of service-related documents; the Court overruled that objection.

During the hearing, all parties submitted that the issue had already been decided in Santosh Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. , WPS No. 6064 of 2026, by order dated 12.08.2026.

Whether the petitioners, as employees of CIDC, were entitled to revision of pay scales and consequential salary benefits for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011 notwithstanding the State’s decision/circular dated 02.03.2012.

Whether the present writ petition ought to be disposed of in accordance with the earlier decisions concerning the identical issue, including the order in WPS No. 6064 of 2026 and 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 concerning the same dispute.

It also followed the binding and directly applicable decisions in WPS No. 697 of 2013 and connected matters, decided on 11.07.2024, and affirmed in Writ Appeal No. 622 of 2024 on 30.09.2024.

The governing rule was that, once the circular dated 02.03.2012 denying the Sixth Pay Commission and related salary revisions was quashed, the affected employees became entitled to the revised pay and consequential arrears for the period from 01.01.2006 to 31.10.2011, subject to verification of the amounts claimed.

The Court found that the factual and legal issues in the present petition were identical to those already determined in WPS No. 6064 of 2026 and the earlier connected litigation.

Since the earlier decision had applied the Supreme Court precedents and had followed the judgment quashing the 02.03.2012 circular, the Court held that there was no justification for taking a different view in the present case.

Accordingly, the petitioners’ entitlement to revised pay and consequential arrears was governed by the directions issued in the earlier proceedings.

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

The State authorities were directed to calculate and pay the arrears and decide the petitioners’ representation, subject to verification of the amounts claimed, preferably within 150 days from receipt of a copy of the order.