AICPI in DA Case: What Was Discussed About AICPI Today? Get the Details

AICPI in DA Case: In the Dearness Allowance (DA) case hearing for state government employees, the main focus today was the All India Consumer Price Index (AICPI). The petitioners’ counsel strongly argued that DA must be calculated based on this index. Experts believe that this line of reasoning has potentially turned the tide of the case. Let’s dive into the details of what was discussed about AICPI in court today.

AICPI and ROPA 2009: What Was the Core Argument?

The lawyer for the Sangrami Joutho Mancha, Mr. Gopal Subramanium, began the hearing by highlighting AICPI as the fundamental basis for DA calculation. He argued before the court that Dearness Allowance is not a charity but an employee’s right. This right, he asserted, is based on the inflation rate, which is determined by the AICPI.

His argument was primarily based on ROPA 2009 (Revision of Pay and Allowances). He pointed out:

• The Mystery of the ‘536 Index’: ROPA 2009 mentions an average index of ‘536’ for DA calculation. The lawyer argued that this number wasn’t arbitrary but was directly derived from the AICPI. This implies that the state government, in its own rules, has accepted AICPI as the foundation for DA.
• Connecting Central and State Policies: He further stated that the Central Government grants DA to its employees based on this very AICPI. When the Centre’s DA was 12%, the West Bengal government provided only 2%, which contradicts the core principle of ROPA 2009.

The Court’s Question and the Lawyer’s Rebuttal

During the arguments, the judges raised a crucial question. They asked if it was mandatory for the state to provide DA based on the AICPI. In other words, is the state legally bound to pay DA at the central rate?

In response, Mr. Subramanium presented a compelling argument. He contended that when the state government has already recognized the AICPI’s index in its own pay commission (ROPA 2009), not providing DA accordingly amounts to duplicity. His main point was that the state government is violating its own established rules. Since the DA calculation formula in ROPA 2009 is intrinsically linked to the AICPI, it is the state’s duty to provide the allowance on that basis.

Summary of the Discussion

After today’s hearing, it is clear that the DA case is no longer just about financial figures. It now hinges on the interpretation of law and the state’s obligation to adhere to its own regulations. The petitioners’ side has successfully argued that AICPI is an inseparable component of DA calculation. Although the case is still ongoing and a final verdict is awaited, today’s AICPI-centric discussion has undoubtedly boosted the morale of the state government employees.