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

The appellants were appointed as Shiksha Karmi (Grade II and III) between 2008 and 2013 by various Janpad and Zila Panchayats

They served under the Panchayat Department until they were absorbed into the School Education Department of the State of Chhattisgarh pursuant to a policy decision dated 30.06.2018

The appellants sought the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman (time-bound pay scale) based on a Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which granted such benefits to Assistant Teachers after 10 and 20 years of service

The learned Single Judge dismissed their writ petition (WPS No. 11009/2025) on 24.11.2025, holding that the circular did not apply to them

1. Whether teachers appointed under the Panchayat cadre are entitled to the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman under the Circular dated 10.03.2017 for service rendered prior to their absorption into the State Government

2. Whether the service rendered as Shiksha Karmi under the Panchayat Department can be treated as equivalent to service under the School Education Department for the purposes of the 2017 Circular

The court applied the State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which regulates the grant of time-bound pay scales to regular government servants

The Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2007 and the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, which establish that Shiksha Karmis are employees of the Panchayat and not the State Government

The court also invoked the restrictive conditions in the Absorption Order dated 30.06.2018, specifically Clauses 4 and 5, which stipulate that all benefits and seniority shall be calculated from the date of absorption (01.07.2018) and no arrears for the prior period shall be payable

The court reasoned that there is a clear legal distinction between State Government employees and the Panchayat cadre.

The Circular dated 10.03.2017 was explicitly intended for regular Government servants and did not extend to Shiksha Karmis who were, at that time, governed by Panchayat-specific service rules

The court noted that the appellants were only absorbed into government service in 2018; therefore, they could not claim the status of government servants for the purpose of seeking benefits under a 2017 circular

The court distinguished the precedent of Smt. Sona Sahu (WA 261/2023), clarifying that it was decided on its unique factual matrix where benefits were previously granted and then rescinded, whereas the current appellants had no such vested entitlement

Furthermore, the court held that the terms of the 2018 absorption order expressly prohibited the claim for financial benefits or arrears for the period prior to 01.07.2018

After condoning a 24-day delay in filing, the Court dismissed the writ appeal, affirming that the Single Judge’s order contained no perversity or infirmity

The appeal was dismissed in accordance with the findings in the coordinate bench's judgment in Writ Appeal No. 191/2026