Panchayat cadre employees are ineligible for time-bound pay scale benefits applicable exclusively to regular government servants.

The 28 appellants were appointed as Shiksha Karmis (Grade-II and Grade-III) under the Panchayat Department between 2008 and 2013

Following a state policy dated 30.06.2018, their services were absorbed into the School Education Department effective 01.07.2018

The appellants sought the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman (time-bound pay scale) based on a Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which granted the first pay-scale upgrade after 10 years of service

A Single Judge of the High Court dismissed their writ petition (WPS No. 11151/2025) on 24.11.2025

The appellants challenged this dismissal, claiming parity with the case of Smt. Sona Sahu (WA No. 261/2023)

1. Whether employees of the Panchayat Cadre (Shiksha Karmis) are entitled to the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman under the Circular dated 10.03.2017 for the period served prior to their absorption into the State Government service

2. Whether the appellants are entitled to parity with the relief granted in Smt. Sona Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh (WA No. 261/2023)

State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which mandates the grant of first and second Kramonnati Vetanman to regular Government Assistant Teachers after 10 and 20 years of service, respectively

The court further relied on the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2007, and the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, to distinguish Panchayat employees from Government servants

The court also enforced Clauses 4 and 5 of the Absorption Order dated 30.06.2018, which explicitly restrict the grant of arrears or financial benefits for the period prior to 01.07.2018

The Court reasoned that the 10.03.2017 Circular applies strictly to regular employees of the School Education Department and does not extend to the Panchayat Cadre

Since the appellants were employees of the Panchayat Department until 2018, their service conditions were governed by Panchayat Rules, not State Government rules

The Court emphasized that Shiksha Karmis cannot be treated as Government servants until their formal absorption

Regarding parity, the Court distinguished the Smt. Sona Sahu case, noting that her relief was based on "peculiar facts" and specific department-specific circulars from 2011 and 2013, whereas the appellants’ claims were barred by the clear restrictive clauses in the 2018 absorption policy

Following its previous decision in Writ Appeal No. 191/2026, the Court found no perversity in the Single Judge’s order

It held that the appellants are not entitled to the benefits of the 2017 Circular as their prior service was in the Panchayat Cadre and the absorption order specifically prohibited retrospective financial benefits

The court also condoned a 36-day delay in filing the appeal