Summary
The Supreme Court directed revised UGC pay benefits for retired Physical Education Directors on parity with similarly situated employees. Karnataka had accepted and implemented a final judgment granting those benefits and continued granting them in other cases despite a later restrictive government order. It could not rely on that omitted order selectively to deny these appellants relief. The ruling was confined to existing pending claims and expressly barred fresh claims or reopening concluded cases.
Issues
- Whether the State could deny benefits while accepting final judgments and extending the same benefits to similarly situated employees.
- How far the parity relief extended to other retired employees.
Held
- The State allowed the favourable judgment concerning a similarly situated employee to become final and implemented it without seeking review, although the later UGC clarification and government order had not been brought to the courts’ attention. It also extended the same benefits to other similarly placed employees subsequently. (¶¶ 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
- In these circumstances, relying on the restrictive 2008 order to deny only the appellants equivalent treatment was unjustified. They were entitled to benefits under the Government Order dated 15 November 1999, including its revised-pay treatment. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11)
- The ruling applies to similar claims already pending before the Administrative Tribunal or High Court. It does not authorise new cases by retired employees who had not challenged denial by the judgment date, or reopening cases already concluded. (¶ 12)
Result
Appeals allowed without costs and High Court judgment set aside. State directed to extend benefits under the Government Order dated 15 November 1999 within three months, subject to the express limits on other claims.