Panchayat cadre employees are ineligible for time-bound pay scales applicable exclusively to regular State Government servants.

The appellant was appointed as a Shiksha Karmi (Grade-II/III) under the Janpad and Zila Panchayat between 1998 and 2008

He served under the Panchayat Department until July 1, 2018, when the State Government absorbed his services into the School Education Department as a Lecturer (L.B.)

The appellant sought the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman (time-bound pay scale) based on a State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017

A learned Single Judge dismissed the appellant's writ petition (WPS No. 11793/2025) on 24.11.2025

The appellant challenged this dismissal, while also seeking condonation of a 33-day delay in filing the appeal

1. Whether the 33-day delay in preferring the writ appeal should be condoned.

2. Whether employees of the Panchayat Cadre (Shiksha Karmi) are entitled to the benefit of the time-bound pay scale under the Circular dated 10.03.2017 for the period prior to their absorption into the State Government.

The court primarily applied the State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which mandates the grant of first and second time-bound pay scales after 10 and 20 years of service, respectively, specifically for regular Government employees

It further relied on the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, and the recruitment rules of 2007 and 2012, which establish that Shiksha Karmis are employees of the Panchayat Department and not the State Government

Additionally, the court applied the restrictive clauses (Clauses 4 and 5) of the Absorption Policy dated 30.06.2018, which clarify that seniority and financial benefits for absorbed employees are to be calculated only from 01.07.2018, with no entitlement to prior arrears

The Court noted that the 2017 Circular was intended for Assistant Teachers and Lecturers already in Government service and did not extend benefits to the Panchayat Cadre

Since the appellant was a Shiksha Karmi under the Panchayat Department until his absorption in 2018, he did not hold the status of a "Government Servant" during the period for which the benefit was sought

The court distinguished the precedent of Smt. Sona Sahu (WA No. 261/2023), ruling that her case was decided based on "peculiar facts" and did not grant a general right of parity to all absorbed teachers

Relying on its previous decision in WA No. 193/2026, the Court held that the legal distinction between State Government employees and Panchayat cadre employees is absolute; therefore, the appellant could not derive benefits from circulars applicable solely to the former for service rendered under the latter

It held that the appellant, as an absorbed employee from the Panchayat cadre, is not entitled to Kramonnati Vetanman under the Circular dated 10.03.2017 for service periods prior to 01.07.2018

The judgment of the learned Single Judge was affirmed as being well-merited and free from perversity

The appeal was dismissed in terms of the decision in Writ Appeal No. 193/2026