The truth about DA Verdict in Supreme Court

Feb 06, 2026 - By Ashutosh Roy Current AffairsPoliticsSociety

Key Highlights

1. Supreme Court DA verdict 2026 rules that Dearness Allowance is a legal right, not a discretionary benefit.
2. West Bengal DA case ends after a decade, bringing relief to state government employees and pensioners.
3. Court directs payment of DA arrears from 2008 to 2019 as per the All India Consumer Price Index (AICPI).
4. West Bengal government ordered to release 25% of arrears by 6 March 2026.
5. Justice Indu Malhotra–led committee formed to calculate total dues and fix a time-bound payment schedule.
6. Supreme Court says financial constraints cannot justify denial of employee rights.
7. Retired employees and pensioners covered under the DA judgment.
8. Verdict sets a legal precedent for service law and DA-related disputes nationwide.
9. Long legal battle exposes the cost of delay, raising questions on governance, litigation expenses, and fiscal planning.
10. Can the Government keep a congenial relationship with its own employees?

Is the Supreme Court DA verdict a historic turning point?

Will the Supreme Court’s DA verdict on 5 February 2026 be remembered as historic or landslide?

The Supreme Court delivered its verdict in the West Bengal DA case on 5 February 2026. The case continued for more than ten years. Therefore, calling this verdict historic is not an exaggeration.

First, the judgment brought relief and hope to a large number of West Bengal government employees. At the same time, it created an important legal precedent for similar cases in the future.

Moreover, this day is extremely significant for those who fought the DA battle from the beginning. For them, it marks a moment of success after a long struggle.

In particular, it stands as a major victory for Bikash Bhattacharya.

In addition, employee bodies such as the Confederation of State Government Employees, West Bengal, and the Unity Forum can finally breathe easy. After years of continuous effort, their long fight has reached its conclusion.

Meanwhile, the timing of events is striking. Just a day earlier, the Chief Minister personally argued the SIR issue in court, creating widespread political buzz. However, the very next day, the state government suffered a defeat in the Supreme Court. This contrast made the outcome even more dramatic.

Furthermore, after the final hearing, the long wait for the verdict had created a sense of unease. Some feared that faith in the judiciary was weakening. However, today’s judgment cleared those doubts.

Finally, the verdict proved one thing clearly. Justice may be quiet, but it does not fade away. In this case, it spoke firmly and decisively.

Historic Timeline  of DA Case

• In 2016, the Confederation of State Government Employees filed the first case before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (SAT). The case was registered as O.A. No. 1154 of 2016. The employees asked the state government to release pending Dearness Allowance (DA) and to fully implement the Fifth Pay Commission recommendations.
• On 16 February 2017, the SAT dismissed the case. The tribunal ruled that DA was an “optional benefit”, similar to a grant. It held that DA was not a legally enforceable right. As a result, the employees challenged this order before the Calcutta High Court.
• On 31 August 2018, the Calcutta High Court set aside the SAT order. The court clearly stated that DA is not charity. Instead, it is a legal right of employees. The High Court then sent the case back to SAT to decide how the rate of DA should be fixed.
• 2016–2019 – The core legal battle: During these three years, the main legal question remained the same. Was DA a right, or was it a gift or donation?
• In May 2022, the Calcutta High Court directed the West Bengal government to pay DA at the Central Government rate.
• In November 2022, the West Bengal government challenged the High Court order and approached the Supreme Court.
• September 2025: After prolonged hearings, the Supreme Court reserved its final judgment in September 2025.
• 5 February 2026 – Final verdict: On 5 February 2026, the Supreme Court delivered its final judgment. The court directed payment of DA arrears and ordered the formation of a committee to ensure implementation.

This long journey shows how a decade-long legal battle finally reached its conclusion and why the DA verdict holds lasting significance.

Historic Debates and Final Outcome

• In 2023, senior advocate Bikash Bhattacharya wrote an article in Anandabazar Patrika, arguing that DA is a fundamental right.
• On the other hand, profund lawyer Arunava Ghosh wrote in the same newspaper that DA was a grant, not a right.

Finally, after many years, all these debates ended with the Supreme Court’s DA verdict.

What does the DA verdict of 5 February 2026 say?

5 February 2026 | Supreme Court DA Judgment

• First, the Supreme Court ruled that Dearness Allowance (DA) is a legally enforceable right of employees. It is not a grant, a donation, or a matter of state discretion.
• Next, the court directed the West Bengal government to pay all pending DA arrears from 2008 to 2019. The calculation must follow the All India Consumer Price Index (AICPI).
• Further, the court ordered the state government to pay 25% of the total DA arrears by 6 March 2026.
• In addition, the Supreme Court formed a high-level committee under former Supreme Court judge Justice Indu Malhotra. The committee has two clear responsibilities: To determine the exact amount of total DA arrears, and To fix a binding timeline for payment of the remaining 75% arrears.
• Meanwhile, Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra made the court’s position very clear. They stated that the government cannot deny a legal right of employees by citing financial hardship.
• Importantly, the judgment also applies to employees who retired during the pendency of the case. They will receive the benefit of this DA verdict as well.
• Finally, the court firmly recognised DA as a legal right, not merely a policy decision. At the same time, it clarified that the issue remains strictly governed by statutory service rules.

Overall, the 5 February 2026 DA verdict sets a strong legal benchmark and reinforces the supremacy of employee rights under service law.

Why did the West Bengal government delay DA payments for years?

Questions that naturally arise after the DA verdict

Now, several related questions inevitably come up. The first and most important one is this, Why did the state government not pay DA voluntarily?

During the Left Front era, there were times when DA could not be increased for nearly two years. Back then, today’s Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, then the Leader of the Opposition, took to the streets. She openly said that a government that cannot pay DA has no moral right to remain in power.

However, the tone changed after 2011.

In 2017, Mamata Banerjee told government employees not to “bark”.

Their only “fault” was that they demanded DA at the Central Government rate. In other words, once someone goes to Lanka, they are branded Ravana—an old story with a new meaning.

At the same time, some ministers made equally arrogant remarks. They told employees that if they were unhappy here, they should join the Central Government. On another occasion, the Chief Minister said that since the state cannot pay DA, it gives more holidays instead.

As a result, a sense of humiliation and anger slowly grew among employees. Their frustration deepened over time. However, the government’s long-standing divide-and-rule policy initially prevented employees from uniting.

Gradually, more and more employees joined the movement. Still, in keeping with the state’s political culture, the familiar “us versus them” narrative continued. Some sections opposed the movement as well.

Despite this, the struggle continued for years. People witnessed police brutality against employee rallies. The irony is hard to miss.

The same police personnel who were deployed against the protesters will also benefit from this DA verdict.

This contrast highlights the deeper contradictions that surrounded the DA issue for over a decade.

What unanswered questions remain after the DA verdict?

Now let’s talk about those who are already retired. Serving employees at least receive a monthly salary. Retired employees do not have that safety net.

Over the years, television reports showed painful realities. Many pensioners could not afford proper medical treatment because they lacked money for medicines. Some even struggled to arrange their daughters’ marriages. Their lives became a daily battle for dignity.

At least now, this verdict brings them some relief, even if it comes very late.

However, one question still refuses to go away.

The court had earlier directed the state government to pay 25% of the DA arrears. The state government did not comply with that order. So the obvious question is: what happened to that disobedience?

This raises a serious issue. When a government ignores a clear judicial direction, it is not a minor lapse. It touches the core of constitutional discipline and respect for the rule of law. Courts usually treat such non-compliance as contempt, or at least as a matter requiring strict explanation.

Yet, in this case, there has been no visible consequence so far. That silence creates discomfort. It also fuels the feeling that ordinary employees wait endlessly, while the powerful can afford delay.

Therefore, while the DA verdict is a major legal victory, it also leaves behind an uneasy pause. Justice has finally arrived—but the question of accountability for past defiance remains open.

Money shortage claims—and the bigger contradiction

For years, the state government has repeated one argument: there is no money. The state’s debt burden is public knowledge. No one denies that financial stress exists.

Then a natural question arises.

1. How does money suddenly appear for “Amader Para, Para Samadhan”?
2. How does the allocation for Lakshmir Bhandar keep increasing year after year?
3. The Government executes so many welfare schemes. Where does the money come from?

Even now, it is clear that the current state budget has earmarked no fund for pending DA payments. But this leads to a deeper issue. Can governance run only by focusing on elections and welfare schemes?

The state government depends heavily on its own employees to function. Their interests cannot be ignored indefinitely. The government must look after them as well.

Even if we set aside questions of humanity and moral rights, the hard economic logic remains. The state spent huge public money fighting this case for years. That legal battle has only increased the financial burden.

So the question is unavoidable. What did the state actually gain from this long litigation? Apart from buying time, did it achieve anything at all?

In the end, delay proved costly. The bill did not disappear, it only grew larger.

Effect in Bengal Election 2026

With the West Bengal Assembly Election  2026 approaching, the Supreme Court’s landmark DA verdict has ignited a fresh political confrontation. The ruling has added a dramatic twist to Bengal’s already volatile political landscape.

Perhaps the million dollar question remains, whether the West Bengal Government will comply with the order or they will go for another set of legal proceedings.

Just a day earlier, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee grabbed national attention by personally arguing her case in the Supreme Court, creating strong political optics. However, within 24 hours, the same court delivered a verdict that went against the West Bengal government.

This Supreme Court DA verdict is now set to strengthen the opposition, giving them fresh momentum and a powerful campaign issue ahead of the 2026 Bengal Assembly polls.