Employer Must Properly Inform Employees About Notices; Merely Uploading on Website Is Not Enough: High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that a government employee cannot be denied a financial benefit simply because the related office order was uploaded on the department’s website. The court said that when an order has a direct impact on an employee’s salary, it must be properly brought to the employee’s notice through a reasonable method of communication.
What Was the Issue?
The case involved an employee who was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant on March 1, 2017. Under the Revised Pay Regulations, 2022, he exercised his option for pay fixation using the 2.59 factor within the prescribed time.
However, another Office Order issued on April 13, 2022 provided a 15% pay hike from the date of promotion for employees who had been promoted between January 1, 2016 and April 12, 2022. Since the employee had been promoted in 2017, he was eligible for this benefit.
The problem was that the employee did not know about the April 13, 2022 Office Order.
Employee Was Posted in the Field
At the relevant time, the employee was posted in the field. He came to know about the April 13 order only after he was transferred to the Headquarters in January 2023.
After reaching the Headquarters, he noticed that some of his juniors were receiving higher salaries. He then found that the difference in salary was linked to the option available under the April 13, 2022 Office Order.
The employee subsequently submitted a representation on May 2, 2024, requesting that he also be allowed to exercise the option for the 15% pay benefit with effect from May 1, 2017.
Department Rejected His Request
The authorities rejected his representation, saying that it had been submitted too late. They argued that employees had been given sufficient time to exercise their options and that the deadline had also been extended up to October 12, 2022.
The authorities also argued that the relevant information was available in the public domain on the department’s website, and therefore the employee could not claim that he was unaware of it.
Employee Approached the High Court
The employee challenged the rejection before the Himachal Pradesh High Court. The Single Judge of the High Court allowed his petition. The authorities then challenged that decision before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi.
What Did the High Court Say?
The Division Bench examined whether the employee could be denied the benefit merely because he had not exercised the option within the prescribed period.
The court noted that the employee had already exercised his option for pay fixation under the Revised Pay Regulations, 2022 within two months of their issuance.
More importantly, the court found that the subsequent orders extending the deadline for exercising the option under the Revised Pay Regulations did not specifically refer to the April 13, 2022 Office Order, which provided the separate 15% benefit.
The court also noted that the employee was eligible for the 15% benefit because he had been promoted on March 1, 2017, which fell within the period covered by the April 13 order.
Website Publication Alone Was Not Enough
A key point in the judgment was the court’s observation that simply uploading an office order on a website is not necessarily enough when the order has financial consequences for employees.
The court said that the April 13, 2022 Office Order directly affected the employee’s monthly salary. Therefore, merely stating that the order was available on the department’s website could not be treated as sufficient communication to the employee.
The court stressed that an order having such financial implications should be brought to the employee’s notice through a reasonable method of publication or communication.
Court Found No Unreasonable Delay
The High Court also rejected the argument that the employee had approached the authorities too late. The Bench observed that the employee was posted in the field and became aware of the relevant office order only after reaching the Headquarters in January 2023. Once he became aware of the issue and the resulting pay disparity, he took steps to raise the matter.
The court therefore held that the delay could not be used against him merely because the office order had been uploaded on a website.
High Court Upholds Earlier Order
The Division Bench relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Harla vs. State of Rajasthan, which established that proper promulgation or publication through a reasonable method is necessary for a law or order to become operative.
After considering the facts, the Division Bench upheld the order of the Single Judge and dismissed the appeal filed by the authorities.
Key Takeaway
The judgment makes it clear that government employees should not automatically lose a salary or financial benefit merely because an office order was uploaded on a website. When an order directly affects an employee’s pay, the authorities must take reasonable steps to ensure that the employee is made aware of it, particularly where the employee is posted in the field and may not have regular access to departmental communications.
Download Court Order PDF (This PDF is available for Premium Users Only. Click here to join premium)
