NewKerala.com

Supreme Court Verdict Today on West Bengal DA Arrears Since 2009

The Supreme Court will deliver its verdict on Thursday regarding the West Bengal government's obligation to pay Dearness Allowance at par with central government employees, including arrears dating back to 2009. The state government has challenged a 2022 Calcutta High Court order that ruled DA was a right of state employees. The state argues that DA payment is not mandatory and its financial structure differs from the Centre's, making parity unsustainable. The final ruling will determine whether lakhs of state government employees receive the long-pending arrears.

Key Points: SC Verdict Today on West Bengal Dearness Allowance Case

  • SC verdict on DA parity today
  • Arrears pending since July 2009
  • State challenged High Court order
  • Financial capacity argued
  • Long legal battle concludes
2 min read

SC to deliver verdict in West Bengal's Dearness Allowance case today

Supreme Court to rule on West Bengal DA arrears case. Verdict on state paying central rates since 2009 to be delivered today.

"Dearness Allowance was the right of state government employees - Calcutta High Court"

Kolkata, Feb 5

The Supreme Court will on Thursday deliver the verdict on pleas, including the one filed by the West Bengal government against the Calcutta High Court 2022 order, asking the state government to pay Dearness Allowance at par with that of central government employees and also to release arrears on this count since July 2009.

The verdict will be delivered by the apex court's Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra today.

The hearing in the matter was concluded at the Supreme Court in September last year. But the Division Bench had then kept the verdict on reserve. Finally, after a prolonged wait of around five months, the apex court will pronounce the verdict in the matter on Thursday.

In this case, the apex court earlier directed the state government to clear 25 per cent of the outstanding Dearness Allowance within six months. However, the state government was unable to comply with the order and instead asked for six months of additional time to comply with the same.

Based on that application, the hearings in the matter were conducted daily for three days in August last year. Again, the matter was heard in September, following which the Division Bench reserved its verdict in the matter.

The long legal battle over payment of Dearness Allowance started at the state administrative tribunal, and subsequently the matter was dragged to the Calcutta High Court.

In 2022, the Calcutta High Court ruled in favour of government employees and observed that Dearness Allowance was the right of state government employees and they were entitled to get it at par with central government employees.

However, the state government approached the Supreme Court challenging that ruling by the Calcutta High Court. The state government claimed that payment of Dearness Allowance was not mandatory and not a fundamental right of the employees, and hence, the state government was not obliged to pay it at the central rate.

The state government's counsel also argued that since the financial structure of the Center and the state was different, the rates of payment of Dearness Allowance would also be different. Therefore, the state cannot be compared with the rate at which the Centre pays DA.

Now, it is to be seen whether the Supreme Court's final order on Monday will bring cheer for state government employees or not.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
While I sympathize with the employees, the state government has a point too. Central and state finances are structured differently. Blanket parity might not be feasible for all states, especially those with weaker financial health. A balanced solution is needed.
R
Rohit P
My father is a retired state employee. This DA arrears since 2009 would mean a lot for his medical expenses. The delay is causing real hardship for thousands of families. The verdict should prioritize the welfare of people who served the state.
A
Aman W
This case shows how slow our judicial process can be. Five months just for a verdict after the hearing? And the case has been going on for over a decade. Justice delayed is justice denied, especially for salaried employees.
J
Jessica F
Interesting to see this from an outsider's perspective. In many countries, cost-of-living adjustments are standard. If the High Court already ruled it's a right, the state challenging it seems like avoiding responsibility. The employees deserve their due.
K
Karthik V
The state's argument that DA is not a fundamental right is technically correct, but it's certainly a contractual and moral right. When prices of everything from petrol to vegetables have skyrocketed since 2009, how can the government deny this adjustment? 🤔

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50