Justice Tshekiso has delivered a very formidable precedent that speaks to the protection of public service employees and the integrity of judicial processes. This significant decision addresses the long-standing dispute regarding salary multgrading and the procedural responsibilities of the state as a litigant.
Entitlement under the 1993 Savingram
The Court held that the 271 Plaintiffs were entitled to benefit from the 1993 Public Service Savingram regarding the multgrading of B-band positions. This savingram remains effective and binding, overriding subsequent directives that attempted to limit these entitlements.
Clean Hands Doctrine
The Court reaffirmed that a litigant in contempt cannot seek the Court’s indulgence. The state, having ignored default judgments without seeking a stay of execution, was found to have approached the Court with "dirty hands."
Rescission Applications
Litigants must understand that rescission applications are not granted for the "mere asking." They demand the utmost seriousness and a thorough explanation of any default.
"He who comes to equity must come with clean hands."
The Judge clarified that a salary scale is naturally composed of different grades, and the 1993 Savingram explicitly combined these into multgraded scales (e.g., B5/4, B4/3). This structural change created lawful entitlements that the government cannot unilaterally extinguish.
Furthermore, the ruling emphasizes that the Attorney General, as the principal legal advisor to the Government, has a heightened responsibility to be exemplary in complying with court orders. Non-compliance under the guise of pending rescission applications is unacceptable in a system governed by the rule of law.
The judgment also addressed the need to avoid unnecessary postponements that clog the court roll and clarified the purpose of statutory notices, which are intended to allow the government adequate time to respond before litigation commences, not to serve as a barrier to justice.