Special Duty Allowance Dispute in Assam Rifles: Supreme Court Ruling Explained

The case revolves around the withdrawal of the Special (Duty) Allowance (SDA) for Assam Rifles personnel by the Government of India, which was challenged in the High Court and later appealed before the Supreme Court. The petitioners in the case were Union of India and others, while the respondents were combatised personnel of Assam Rifles.

Background of the Case

The Special (Duty) Allowance was introduced in 1983 for Central Government civilian employees posted in the North-Eastern region and later extended to Assam Rifles personnel in 1989. However, after the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission, a new Risk/Hardship Allowance was introduced in 2009 as an alternative.

Following a clarification from the Government of India in 2011, the Director General of Assam Rifles ordered the withdrawal of the Special (Duty) Allowance for personnel receiving the Risk/Hardship Allowance. The personnel were given an option to choose between the two allowances.

Legal Proceedings

The respondents challenged the withdrawal of SDA before the Guwahati High Court, which ruled in their favor. The High Court held that SDA, having been granted through a Presidential sanction, could not be withdrawn by an order of the Director General of Assam Rifles.

The Union of India appealed this decision before the Supreme Court.

Arguments by the Petitioners

The Union of India, represented by Solicitor General Mr. Ranjit Kumar, argued that:

• The Government of India clarified that personnel receiving Risk/Hardship Allowance were not eligible for SDA, as both were compensatory in nature.
• The Director General’s order was merely a correction of an earlier mistake, implementing the government’s clarification from 2011.
• The personnel were never entitled to both allowances simultaneously.

Arguments by the Respondents

Senior Counsel Mr. Sunil Kumar, representing the respondents, contended that:

• SDA was not a compensatory allowance but a distinct benefit extended to Assam Rifles personnel.
• The withdrawal of SDA without Presidential approval was unlawful.
• Combatised personnel were entitled to both allowances as per the government’s earlier communications.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court analyzed the office memorandum issued in 2009, which clearly stated that personnel had to choose between SDA and Risk/Hardship Allowance. The Court found that SDA was, in fact, a compensatory allowance, and there was no right to receive both allowances.

“The existing package of compensatory allowance would necessarily include the Special (Duty) Allowance which, in our opinion, is a compensatory allowance.”

The Court also rejected the High Court’s view that the Director General lacked the authority to withdraw SDA. It held that the order was a necessary step to correct an error in the administration of allowances.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and ruled in favor of the Union of India. However, it directed that no recovery should be made from personnel for the allowances already paid.

This judgment clarifies the government’s discretion in restructuring compensation policies and emphasizes the need for administrative decisions to align with established policies.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Union of India & Ors vs Sh. Sarvendra Singh Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 17-08-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Pension and Gratuity
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by S. A. Bobde
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2017
See all petitions in 2017 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category