Department Must Decisively Rule on Employee Representations for Revised Pay Scale Benefits within Specified Timeline

The thirty-six petitioners are employees of the SC/ST Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, stationed across various districts.

They claim entitlement to revised pay scales (Pay Levels 11 and 12) pursuant to the 7th Pay Revision Commission recommendations, which were officially accepted by the State via Resolution No. 3590 dated 24.05.2017.

Despite submitting multiple representations between December 2023 and February 2026 to the Secretary of the SC/ST Welfare Department requesting the implementation of these benefits w.e.f. 01.01.2016, no administrative decision was rendered.

Consequently, the petitioners approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus.

1. Whether the respondents are legally obligated to decide upon the petitioners' pending representations regarding the implementation of the 7th Pay Revision Commission benefits

2. Whether the Court should exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 to direct a time-bound administrative resolution before adjudicating on the merits of the pay scale claim

The court applied the principle of administrative responsiveness and the prerequisite for a writ of mandamus, which requires a prior demand for justice and a subsequent refusal by the authority.

State Government’s Resolution No. 3590 dated 24.05.2017 regarding the 7th Pay Revision Commission.

The court exercised its discretion to avoid unnecessary litigation ("linger this matter") by requiring the exhaustion of administrative remedies through a "reasoned and speaking order".

The Court observed that while the petitioners sought a direct mandamus for pay level upgrades, their primary grievance stemmed from the administrative inaction on representations filed over a span of three years.

The Court reasoned that a counter-affidavit from the State would unnecessarily delay the proceedings.

Instead, it determined that before the Court applies its judicial mind to the merits of the pay revision claim, the competent authority—Respondent No. 2 (Secretary, SC/ST Welfare Department)—must first exercise its administrative function. By directing the authority to pass a "reasoned and speaking order," the Court ensures that the administrative facts are settled and the petitioners' legal rights are formally considered at the departmental level first.

It directed Respondent No. 2 to take a decision on the petitioners' representations and pass a reasoned and speaking order within 90 days from the date of receipt of the court’s order. The petitioners were granted liberty to file fresh or supplementary representations to further substantiate their claims.