Gangavath Ekitha | Edited By Prabhat Bandhulya
The Court directed the government to predicate the DA on an All India Consumer Price Index Average instead of the cost of living index of a specific location, as the nation had tried to argue. The Supreme Court ruled that the state also couldn't diverge from the simply inevitable by trying to claim "incapability" to fulfil the criteria. The judge dismissed the government's argument that DA payouts could vary based on the owner's location - Delhi, Chennai, or Kolkata. The High Court governed that although the state was within its privileges and provide special allowances to staff based on location, it could not do so whereas receiving DA.
At around the same time, the high Court retained that the state government wasn't really required to pay DA to its staff at central govt rates. A division bench headed by justice Harish Tandon and Rabindranath Samanta rejected the state's petition filed and affirmed the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal's 2016 judgement in the DA case.