Gujarat HC Directs Payment of Higher Grade Arrears to Botad Primary Teachers, Strikes Down Notional Treatment Clause

Gujarat High Court holds that primary teachers in Botad District are entitled to actual arrears of first higher grade pay from date of entitlement, rejecting the State's notional-treatment restriction under the 2022 Government Resolution.

The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad has directed the State and the Ahmedabad Urban Development Consultancy to pay actual arrears of the first higher grade pay scale to a group of primary teachers appointed in Botad District, overturning the portion of the Government Resolution dated 12 October 2022 that treated the intervening period only notionally. Justice Nirzar S. Desai, sitting singly, disposed of two Special Civil Applications, SCA No. 14155 of 2025 and SCA No. 17850 of 2025, on 4 May 2026, following an earlier coordinate bench decision that had already settled the same legal question. The arrears are to be calculated and paid within 12 weeks of receipt of the judgment. No interest has been awarded, given the matter involves a policy exception by the State.

The Dispute Before the Court

The petitioners are primary teachers appointed on 5 September 2011 in different primary schools in Botad District, except one petitioner who was appointed on 5 July 2010. All were recruited through the 2010–2011 recruitment process.

Under the Government Resolution dated 16 August 1994, primary teachers in the pay scale of Rs. 1,400–2,600 became entitled to a higher pay scale of Rs. 5,000–150–8,000 (Grade Pay of Rs. 4,200) upon completing nine years of service. The petitioners completed nine years of service during 2019–2020 and thereby became eligible for this first higher pay scale at that point.

The benefit was not extended at the time of eligibility. It was granted only after the Government Resolution dated 12 October 2022 was issued. That resolution, however, directed that the period between the date of entitlement and the date of the resolution be treated “notionally”—meaning no actual arrears would be paid for that gap. The petitioners challenged this restriction, seeking actual arrears from the date of their entitlement until 12 October 2022.

The Anomaly the 2022 Resolution Was Meant to Fix

The background to the 2022 resolution is central to the court's reasoning. Primary teachers working in Municipal School Boards where a promotional post of Education Inspector existed were being revised to the higher pay scale of Rs. 5,000–8,000 upon completing nine years of service. Teachers in School Boards where no such post existed were revised only to the lower scale of Rs. 4,500–7,000.

This created a situation where senior teachers in boards without an Education Inspector post were drawing salaries lower than junior teachers in boards where such a post existed. The State Government, conscious of this anomaly, passed the resolution of 12 October 2022 to ensure that from 1 January 1996, all primary teachers in Municipal School Boards would be entitled to the first higher grade in the pay scale of Rs. 5,000–8,000, regardless of whether a post of Education Inspector existed in their establishment.

The State's position before the court was that arrears should be paid only to teachers in School Boards where the post of Education Inspector was available. The court found this argument directly contradicted the purpose of the resolution itself.

How the Bench Reasoned

Justice Desai reproduced at length the reasoning from the earlier decision dated 20 February 2024 in SCA No. 4368 of 2020, which had already addressed the identical question. That decision had been challenged by the State through Letters Patent Appeal No. 423 of 2025, which a Division Bench dismissed on 27 March 2025. The earlier decision had thus attained finality, and the court held the present petitions were squarely covered by it.

The court rejected the State's three objections in turn. The first was that no promotional post of Education Inspector was available in the relevant Municipal School Board. The court held that tying the payment of higher grade to the availability of a promotional post was “completely fallacious” and went against the grain of the 2022 resolution. The very reason the resolution was passed was to remove the discrimination arising from the presence or absence of that post.

The second objection was that the petition contained no averment confirming the existence of a post of Education Inspector. The court found this irrelevant: the resolution itself granted the benefit irrespective of whether such a post existed, and the State could not now reintroduce that condition through the back door.

The third objection was delay. The court held that the cause of action arose from the Government Resolution dated 12 October 2022 itself, since it was that resolution which treated the arrears as notional. The petitions could not be said to be barred by delay when the grievance was directly tied to a resolution issued in 2022. The court also noted that the Government Resolution failed to provide any rationale for withholding arrears, making the delay argument untenable.

The court further pointed to an order dated 20 April 2023, passed by the State after primary teachers in the Municipal School Board at Surat filed SCA No. 5849 of 2023 and allied matters. In that order, the State had accepted that Surat teachers were entitled to arrears because the post of Education Inspector existed in the Surat setup. The court found it impermissible for the State to have restricted the benefit of arrears to only those School Boards where the Education Inspector post existed, having already passed a resolution granting the higher grade from 1 January 1996 irrespective of that post.

The court also distinguished a Division Bench decision in Letters Patent Appeal No. 4339 of 2020 dated 16 September 2020, which the State had relied upon. That case involved Junior Clerks seeking higher grade in the cadre of Head Clerk when a post of Senior Clerk was available in their establishment. The court found the facts materially different and held that the Division Bench's observations in that case did not assist the State's position here, particularly since the State had itself passed the 2022 resolution accepting the petitioners' entitlement.

The Notional Treatment Clause

Condition No. 2 of the Government Resolution dated 12 October 2022 directed that the period from the date of entitlement to the date of the resolution be treated notionally. The court held this condition required interference. The resolution's own recitals acknowledged the anomaly and the State's awareness that senior teachers had been underpaid on account of the absence of a promotional post. Given that awareness, the court held it was incumbent on the State to have ensured actual payment of arrears rather than treating the period notionally.

The court declared the petitioners entitled to actual arrears from the date of their entitlement, upon completion of nine years of service, until the date of the Government Resolution dated 12 October 2022. The notional treatment clause was set aside to that extent.

Outcome

Both Special Civil Applications were allowed. The court declared the petitioners entitled to arrears upon revision as per the first higher grade in the pay scale of Rs. 5,000–8,000, from the date of their individual entitlement until 12 October 2022. The respondents were directed to calculate and pay the arrears within 12 weeks of receipt of the judgment.

No interest was awarded on the arrears. The court noted that since the matter relates to a policy decision by the State where an exception is made to the general rule, interest was not warranted. Rule was made absolute. Direct service was permitted.