Panchayat Cadre Teachers are ineligible for Government Kramonnati Vetanman benefits prior to their formal absorption into State service.

The Appellants were originally appointed as Shiksha Karmi (Grade II and III) under the Panchayat Department between 2008 and 2013

Their services were later absorbed into the School Education Department of the State Government on 01.07.2018

The Appellants sought the benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman (time-bound pay scale) as per a State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which provides for pay scale upgrades after 10 and 20 years of service

A Single Judge dismissed their writ petition (WPS No. 12293/2025) on 24.11.2025, leading to this intra-court appeal

Whether the Circular dated 10.03.2017, regarding time-bound pay scales for Government teachers, is applicable to employees originally appointed under the Panchayat Cadre (Shiksha Karmi) prior to their absorption into State service

Whether the appellants are entitled to parity with the case of Smt. Sona Sahu (WA No. 261/2023) regarding the grant of Kramonnati benefits

State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which restricts benefits to regular Government servants

Absorption policy dated 30.06.2018, specifically Clauses 4 and 5, which stipulate that seniority and financial benefits for absorbed teachers accrue only from 01.07.2018, expressly barring arrears for the period prior to absorption

The distinction between Panchayat employees and State Government employees established under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2007 and the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993

Writ Appeal No. 191/2026

The Court reasoned that the 10.03.2017 Circular was intended solely for regular Government employees and did not extend to the Panchayat Cadre

Since the Appellants were employees of the Panchayat Department until 2018, their service conditions were governed by Panchayat-specific rules, not State Government circulars

The Court distinguished the Sona Sahu case, noting it was decided on "peculiar facts" and that parity could not be claimed because the Appellants had not completed the requisite 10 years of service in the Government cadre at the relevant time

The Court noted that the absorption order of 2018 specifically prohibited the payment of any arrears or the counting of past service for financial benefits prior to the date of joining the School Education Department

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Single Judge's order