H C. Jabalpur-Grant the due annual increment to the petitioners either on 1st July or 1st January of their retirement year.

-

 Here is a summary of the case in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur:

Case Details:

  • Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur
  • Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, Chief Justice & Hon'ble Shri Justice Vivek Jain
  • Date: 15th October, 2024
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No. 14060 of 2024 (with several other petitions, including WP/17001/2024, WP/18050/2024, etc.)

Parties:

  • Petitioner: Ram Prasad Kushwah
  • Respondent: The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Legal Representation:

  • For Petitioners: Various advocates including Shri Taman K. Khadka, Shri Vijay Kumar Narwariya, and others.
  • For Respondents/State: Smt. Janhavi Pandit (Additional Advocate General) and Shri S.S. Chauhan (Government Advocate).

Common Grievance:

The petitioners, or the legal heirs of retired employees, raised the issue regarding the non-grant of their annual increment, which became due on 1st July or 1st January of their retirement year, but was not extended. The employees retired either on 30th June or 31st December of their superannuation year. The petitioners argued that they were entitled to the increment and pensionary benefits from the due date.

Judgment Highlights:

  1. Supreme Court Precedent: The petitioners relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Director (ADMN) and HR KPTCL v. C.P. Mundinamani, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401, which ruled that annual increment becomes due after one year of service with good conduct, even if the employee retires on the last day of service.

  2. Circular Reference: A circular dated 15.03.2024 issued by the Finance Department of Madhya Pradesh also directed departments to grant increments to retired employees on 30th June or 31st December.

  3. Court's Decision: The court directed the respondents to:

    • Grant the due annual increment to the petitioners either on 1st July or 1st January of their retirement year.
    • Pay arrears from 1st May 2023 along with 7% interest per annum, following the Supreme Court’s order in the case of M. Siddaraj.

  4. Arrears Limitation: If there was a delay in filing the petition, the arrears would only be paid from 1st May 2023.

  5. Order Timeline: The respondents are to comply with the order and pay the increment and arrears within six weeks.

Outcome:

The writ petitions were disposed of with directions to provide the pensionary benefits, including the increment, to the petitioners as per the outlined conditions.

The case underlines the entitlement of retired employees to receive annual increments that become due immediately before their retirement, even if they retire on the last day of a half-year, with directions based on Supreme Court precedents. 

IN THE    HIGH   COURT    OF   MADHYA

A T J A B A L P U R

BEFORE

PRADESH

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT, CHIEF JUSTICE

&

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN ON THE 15th OF OCTOBER, 2024

WRIT PETITION No. 14060 of 2024

RAM PRASAD KUSHWAH

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS AND

WP/17001/2024,

WP/18050/2024,

WP/19849/2024,

WP/20618/2024,

WP/23753/2024,

WP/23841/2024,

WP/24449/2024,

WP/25228/2024,

WP/26248/2024,

WP/26306/2024,

WP/27339/2024,

WP/27627/2024,

WP/28228/2024,

WP/28303/2024,

WP/28344/2024,

WP/28362/2024,

WP/28366/2024,

WP/28391/2024,

WP/28442/2024,

WP/28445/2024,

WP/28566/2024,

WP/28571/2024,

WP/28582/2024,

WP/28609/2024,

WP/28622/2024,

WP/28810/2024,

WP/28813/2024,

WP/28847/2024,

WP/28884/2024,

WP/28999/2024,

WP/29343/2024,

WP/29345/2024,

WP/29403/2024,

WP/29404/2024,

WP/29486/2024,

WP/29501/2024,

WP/29503/2024,

WP/29538/2024,

WP/29569/2024,

WP/29615/2024,

WP/29620/2024,

WP/29670/2024,

WP/29683/2024,

WP/29687/2024,

WP/29773/2024,

WP/29789/2024,

WP/29851/2024,

WP/29866/2024,

WP/29915/2024,

WP/30067/2024,

WP/30073/2024,

WP/30075/2024,

WP/30076/2024,

WP/30078/2024,

WP/30079/2024,

WP/30096/2024,

WP/30145/2024,

WP/30151/2024,

WP/30188/2024,

WP/30195/2024,

WP/30326/2024,

WP/30472/2024,

WP/30496/2024,

WP/30499/2024,

WP/30506/2024,

WP/30599/2024,

WP/30629/2024,

WP/30636/2024,

WP/30654/2024,

WP/30658/2024,

WP/30722/2024,

WP/30724/2024,

WP/30797/2024,

WP/30831/2024,

WP/30832/2024,

WP/30863/2024,

WP/30864/2024,

WP/30908/2024,

WP/30923/2024,

WP/30930/2024,

WP/30959/2024,

WP/31019/2024,

WP/31085/2024,

WP/31141/2024,

WP/31262/2024,

WP/31266/2024,

WP/31293/2024,

WP/23835/2024

 

Appearance:

Shri Taman

K. Khadka and Shri Vijay Kumar

Narwariya, Shri

Ashish Vishwakarma, Shri Nikesh Vishwakarma, Shri Shri Vidya Prasad, Shri Sudeep Singh Saini, Shri Ajay

Kaustubh Singh, Kumar Dwivedi,

Shri Ram Babu Dubey, Shri Awadhesh Kumar Singh, Shri Ajeet Kumar Singh, Shri Balram Koshta, Shri Mahendra Pateriya, Shri Rajesh Prasad Dubey, Shri Shakti Kumar Soni, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Dwivedi, Shri Rahul Mishra, Shri Pramod Singh Tomar, Shri Ram Naresh Vishwakarma, Shri

Dhirendra Kumar Khare, Shri Rohit Sohgaura, Shri Akash Choudhury,

Shri Shyam Yadav, Shri Raja Bhaiya Tiwari, Shri Awadhesh Kumar Gupta, Shri Aditya Veer Singh, Shri Shailesh Tiwari, Shri Deep Kumar Patel, Shri Deepak Kumar Singh, Shri Subodh Tamrakar, Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, Shri Manoj Tiwari, Shri Vishnu Deo Singh Chauhan, Shri

Bal Krishna Mishra, Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Shri Rajesh Kumar

Sharma, Shri Mukesh Kumar Tare, Shri Lalji Kushwaha, Shri Devraj Vishwakarma, Shri Sachin Pandey, Shri Rohit Mishra, Shri Prateek Jain, Shri Brijesh Kumar Choubey, Shri Neeraj Jain, Shri Aniruddha Prasad Pandey, Shri Vivek Agrawal, Shri Kailash Dev Singh, Shri Rajneesh Kumar Verma, Shri Devendra Kumar Tripathi, Shri Manoj Kumar Rajak, Shri Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Shri Sandeep Koshta and Shri Jitendra Kumar Sharma learned counsel for petitioners.

Smt. Janhavi Pandit, Additional Advocate General with Shri S.S. Chauhan, Government Advocate for respondents/State.

Shri Shobhitaditya, Advocate for respondent/High Court in WP No.27339/2024.


 

ORDER

 

Per: Suresh Kumar Kait, Chief Justice

 

In all these

writ petitions, a common question of

fact and law is

involved and therefore, they are heard analogously and this common order.

disposed of by

2.                 A common grievance of the petitioners in this batch of writ

petitions is with regard to grant of annual increment which became due

on  completion of superannuation. In

one year’s   service before attaining the age of some of the cases, the petitioners or the employees

whose widows/legal heirs have approached this Court, have retired from

u
 

service on 30th J

ne and while in others, they have

retired on 31st

y
 

December of the   ear of their superannuation. It is their case that they

have not been extended the benefit of increment which otherwise became due to them on 1st July of the same year or 1st January of the next year, as the case may be. Hence, these petitions have been filed.

3.                 Learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Director (ADMN) and HR KPTCL v. C.P. Mundinamani, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401, wherein

it is held that the entitlement to receive annual increment crystallises

when the Government servant completes a requisite length of service with

a
 

good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding d y. The Supreme

Court further held that annual increment earned on the last day of service for rendering good service preceding one year from the date of retirement

with good behaviour and efficiency was liable to employees.

be paid to the

4.                

e
 

Circular dat d 15.03.2024 issued by the Finance Department of the

State  of  Madhya

Pradesh  has  also  been  referred

to,  wherein  all

departments have been directed to grant annual increment to all the

employees who have retired on 30th June / 31st December with regard to annual increment that became payable on 1st July or 1st January, as the case may be. Hence, it is prayed that the respondents may be directed to extend the pensionary benefits to the petitioners after adding annual

increment from the due date along with arrears and within a stipulated time.

5.         Learned counsel for the State submits that the issue

interest thereon

 

 

involved in the

s
 

present petitions i   covered by the said Circular and the same is being

implemented   and accordingly.

the   cases   are   being   scrutinized

and   processed

6.                 Be that as it may, since petitioners/employees superannuated from

service on 30th   June or 31st   December as the case

may be, they are

e
 

entitled to get th    annual increment on the succeeding day of their

retirement i.e. on 1st of July or 1st of January, as the case may be.

 

7.                 That this Court following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the

case of Rushibhai Corporation, 2022

Jagdishchandra Pathak Vs. Bhavnagar Municipal

SCC Online SC 641 had noticed that as there was

delay in approaching the Court, the benefit of arrears was restricted to a

period of three years immediately preceding the filing of the petition.

However, the Supreme Court in respect of C.P. Mundinamani (supra) has clarified by order dated 06.09.2024 in Miscellaneous Application (Diary) No.2400/2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722/2021 titled Union of India & Another Vs. M. Siddaraj as under:

 

“(a). The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment, that is, the pension by taking into account one increment will be payable

on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for prior to 31.04.2023 will not be paid.

the period

 

(b)   For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment would have to be paid.

(c)   The direction in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has

not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been

preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court.

 

(d)   In case any retired employee has filed any application for intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from the month in which the application for intervention/impleadment was filed.”

 

8.                 In this view of the matter, in cases where there is a delay by the

petitioners in approaching the Court, the benefit of arrears shall be

restricted and shall be payable only w.e.f. 01.05.2023 along with interest

@7% per annum

Siddaraj (supra).

as directed by the Supreme Court in

the case of M.

 

9.        

r
 

Accordingly,  the  respondents  are  directed  to  grant  the  annual

k
 

increment to the petitioners which became due to them on 1st of July of the year of their superannuation or 1st of January of the succeeding year, as the case may be, with all consequential benefits. Further, it is directed that the amount accrued in favour of the petitioners on account of annual

increment be paid

to them within a period of six wee

s in accordance

with the order of the Supreme Court dated 06.09.2024 passed in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra).

10.            

h
 

In view of t the above terms.

e foregoing, all these writ petitions are disposed of in

 

 

 

 

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)                                                (VIVEK JAIN) CHIEF JUSTICE                                                               JUDGE

 

 

 

SKM

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Approval of the Government of India for extending the benefits of the Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) to all senior citizens aged 70 years and above.National Health Authority L.S. CHANGSAN (I.A.S.) Chief Executive Officer D. O. No. S-12018/395/2022-NHA 20th September, 2024

-
Image
  National Health Authority This is to inform you of the approval of the Government of India for extending the benefits of the Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) to all senior citizens aged 70 years and above. 2. Salient features of the approval are as below: a. The benefits of AB PM-JAY would now be available to all senior citizens of the age 70 years and above irrespective of their socio-economic status. These benefits will be available to senior citizens of 70 years and above in families already covered under AB PM-JAY (hereinafter referred to as ‘existing families’), as well as in families which are not covered under the AB PM-JAY, (hereinafter referred to as ‘new families’). b. The only eligibility criteria for availing benefits under the scheme would be attainment of age of 70 years or above by the individual. This would be determined on the basis of age recorded in Aadhaar. As per prevailing practice, Aadhaar would be the only document requi
Read more

Grant of notional increment on 1st July I 1st January to the employees who retired from Central Govt, service on 30th June / 31st December respectively for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits - regarding.

-
Image
  Grant of notional increment on 1st July/1st January to the employees who retired from Central Govt. service on 30th June / 31st December respectively for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits – Implementation Order by DoP&T O.M. dated 14.10.2024 No.19/116/2024-Pers.Pol.(Pay)(Pt) Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions Department of Personnel & Training North Block, New Delhi Dated the 14th October, 2024. OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Grant of notional increment on 1st July/1st January to the employees who retired from Central Govt.service on 30th June / 31st December respectively for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits – regarding. The undersigned is directed to say that in terms of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revise Pay) Rules, 2006, notified by D/o Expenditure vide Notification No.G.S.R.622 (E) dated 29.08.2008, date of annual increment was made uniform viz. 1st July of every year with effect from 0
Read more