Pay-scale benefits under a circular are unavailable to government servants retiring before its implementation date.

The petitioner was appointed as an Upper Division Teacher on July 1, 1976, and subsequently promoted to Headmaster and then Lecturer.

He retired from service on April 30, 2014.

Following a previous petition (W.P. No. 3510/2015), the petitioner was granted the benefit of a second kramonnati based on the Division Bench judgment in State of M.P. & Others v. Ram Swaroop Singh Kushwaha.

The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking the second and third time-scale pay benefits upon completion of 20 and 30 years of service, encashment of 340 days of surrendered leave, and revision of pension.

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the second time-scale pay benefit under the circular dated January 24, 2008.

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the third time-scale pay benefit under the circular dated September 30, 2014, having retired prior to its implementation.

3. Whether the petitioner, as an employee of a vacation department, is entitled to encashment of 340 days of earned leave under Rule 27 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977.

The court primarily applied the State Government Circular dated January 24, 2008, which governs the grant of first and second time-scale pay.

It further relied on the Circular dated September 30, 2014, which mandates that the third time-scale pay is applicable only from July 1, 2014, for employees completing 30 years of service.

Regarding leave encashment, the court applied Rule 27 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977, which stipulates that personnel in vacation departments are not entitled to earned leave except for periods where they were expressly ordered to work during vacations by a competent authority.

Regarding the second time-scale pay, the court noted that since the petitioner had already received the second kramonnati, further entitlement depended on completing 10 years of service from the date of that grant; however, the petitioner failed to provide the necessary material dates to establish this claim.

For the third time-scale pay, the court observed that the governing circular (30.09.2014) was implemented on July 1, 2014. Since the petitioner retired on April 30, 2014, he was ineligible as the benefit did not exist at the time of his retirement.

Finally, regarding leave encashment, the court found that as a member of a vacation department, the petitioner was only entitled to encashment for days worked during vacations. The court held that service book entries merely indicate leave entitlement but do not prove the petitioner worked during vacations under official orders, which is a prerequisite for encashment beyond the 37 days already granted by the State.

The petition was disposed of with a direction granting the petitioner liberty to submit a representation to the competent authority, supported by relevant documents proving he worked during vacations under official orders, to claim further leave encashment.

No relief was granted regarding the revision of pension as it was contingent upon the primary claims.