Maheshkumar Chandulal Patel & Anr. v. The State of Gujarat & Ors.
Judgment
8 S.C.R. 472 : 2024 INSC 608 Maheshkumar Chandulal Patel & Anr. v. The State of Gujarat & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 9059 of 2024) 14 August 2024 [Vikram Nath* and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Applicability of the Rule of Stepping up of pay of a Government employee on the basis of the pay of his junior. Headnotes† Gujarat Civil Services (Pay) Rules, 2002 – Rule 21 – Stepping up of pay – Assistant Professors in Government Colleges in Gujarat – Applicability of: Held: Rule of stepping up shall apply only if the anomaly is the direct result of the application of Rule 21 and only if the conditions specified therein are fulfilled – One of the condition stipulates that if even in the lower post, the junior Government employee draws a higher rate of pay than the senior, by way of fixation of the pay or by grant of advance increments, the same shall not be applicable to step up the pay of the senior Government employee – In the present case, the anomaly in pay is not a direct result of Rule 21 – Rather, the anomaly arose because of the fact that the Junior employees were granted the benefit of Senior Scale/Selection Grade Pay by taking into account the ad hoc services that they had rendered in the past – Hence, Rule 21 became inapplicable in the present case – Stepping up of pay in the present case would go against the principle of equity as the benefit cannot be given to those who were not even born in the cadre, for claiming benefits for the service that they have not actually rendered. [Paras 31, 32, 33] Case Law Cited Union of India v. R. Swaminathan [1997] Supp. 4 SCR 94 : (1997) 7 SCC 690; Union of India v. M. Suryanarayana Rao [1998] 3 SCR 1060 : (1998) 6 SCC 400 – relied on. Union of India & Ors. v. C.R. Madhava Murthy & Anr. [2022] 3 SCR 22 : (2022) 6 SCC 183; Ashok Ram Parhad & * Author [2024] 8 S.C.R. 473 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2023] 2 SCR 900 : (2023) SCC Online 265; Gurcharan Singh Grewal v. Punjab SEB (2009) 3 SCC 94 – distinguished.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.