- (1.) The grievance of the petitioners was that after 1991 payment of enhanced dearness allowance to the appellant's association was stopped. This fact has been taken note of in the judgment dated 19th August, 2005. The Division Bench of this Court formulated two questions: (a) Whether the learned Single judge was right in his approach in holding that the present writ application was barred by the decision in the earlier writ application decided by the Patna High Court? (b) Whether on account of the option exercised by the members of the appellant Association for the Wage Board scales of pay, they would stand barred from receiving the benefits of increased dearness relief as recommended by the Wage Board in future?
(2.) In paragraph 19 of the said judgment, it has been held that "A promise was thus made to the members of the appellant Association that in respect of opting for the Wage Board scales of pay, they would in future be entitled to such recommendations regarding the increase in the dearness relief as may be recommended by the Wage Board".
(3.) Therefore, it appears that the options must have been exercised by the employees for being governed by the Wage Board scales of pay prior to filing of the writ petition and, therefore, as well as according to respondents themselves, the writ petitioner now contempt nor or members of its association are entitled to get the benefit as per Wage Board scales of pay obviously it can be from the date of option exercises by them.;