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

KOLKATA — 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.