Employees receive revised pay only from the date it is extended to their institution.

The appellants were appointed as Pump Attendants at Government Medical College, Rajnandgaon, on 14 May 2018, in the pay scale of Rs. 4750–7440 with Grade Pay of Rs. 1300. A circular dated 23 June 2015 had revised the pay scale of Pump Attendants at Government Medical College, Raigarh, but applied only to that college.

On 14 December 2020, the Director of Medical Education recommended extending the revised scale of Rs. 5200–20200 with Grade Pay of Rs. 1800 to Pump Attendants in all Government Medical Colleges. The Single Judge held the State’s action discriminatory and granted the revised scale from 14 December 2020, but not from the appellants’ appointment dates. Their review petition was dismissed, and they appealed.

1. Whether the appellants were entitled to the revised pay scale from their initial appointment on 14 May 2018, rather than from 14 December 2020.

2. Whether the Single Judge’s order granting the revised pay scale from 14 December 2020 warranted interference in appeal.

No statute, regulation, or precedent was cited. The Court applied the terms and scope of the relevant government circular and recommendation: the 23 June 2015 circular revised the pay scale only for Pump Attendants at Government Medical College, Raigarh, while the Director of Medical Education’s recommendation dated 14 December 2020 proposed extending the revised scale to all Government Medical Colleges.

Accordingly, the appellants’ entitlement at Rajnandgaon did not arise under the 2015 circular; the Court upheld the revised scale from the date of the later recommendation.

Because the appellants worked at Government Medical College, Rajnandgaon, the 2015 circular—which was limited to Raigarh—did not entitle them to the revised scale from their appointments in 2018. The Director’s recommendation to extend the scale across Government Medical Colleges was made on 14 December 2020.

The Court therefore found no error in the Single Judge’s direction granting the revised scale from that date, rather than from the appellants’ initial appointment.

Although the State also raised delay and laches, the Court did not decide that question because it found the appeal meritless.

The writ appeal was dismissed on the merits; the delay-and-laches objection was left undecided.