IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Principal Accountant General & Anr. vs. C. Subba Rao Date of Judgment: 27 January 2005 Bench: B. Nazki, V. Rao, P. Narayan Writ Petition Nos. 24191, 24308, 24324, and 24325 of 2003 are allowed. The orders granting annual increments post-retirement are set aside. Writ Petition No. 22042 of 2003 is partly allowed. The respondent is denied the annual increment due on 01.01.2002 but is entitled to DA at the revised rate applicable to pensioners
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Principal Accountant General & Anr. vs. C. Subba Rao
Date of Judgment: 27 January 2005
Bench: B. Nazki, V. Rao, P. Narayan
Writ Petition Nos. 24191, 24308, 24324, and 24325 of 2003 are allowed. The orders granting annual increments post-retirement are set aside.
Writ Petition No. 22042 of 2003 is partly allowed. The respondent is denied the annual increment due on 01.01.2002 but is entitled to DA at the revised rate applicable to pensioners.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Principal Accountant General & Anr. vs. C. Subba Rao
Date of Judgment: 27 January 2005
Bench: B. Nazki, V. Rao, P. Narayana
JUDGMENT
V.V.S. Rao, J.
Introduction
These writ petitions were filed by the Principal Accountant General of Andhra Pradesh and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, New Delhi, challenging the judgments and orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, in different Original Applications filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The Tribunal had relied on its earlier decision in P. Yellamanda v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India, a Division Bench judgment in Union of India v. R. Malakondaiah, and the Supreme Court's ruling in S. Banerjee v. Union of India. The Division Bench, considering the complexity of the issue, referred the matter to a Full Bench.
Background Facts
The issue concerns retired employees whose increments were due on the first day of the month following their retirement. The respondents claimed their annual increments and increased DA installments, while the petitioners contested these claims. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the retired employees, directing the petitioners to grant the increments and enhanced DA benefits.
A table summarizing the retirement dates and due increments is provided:
| Sl. No | WP No. | Retirement Date | Increment Due Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 22042/2003 | 31.12.2001 | 01.01.2002 |
| 2 | 24191/2003 | 30.06.1994 | 01.07.1994 |
| 3 | 24308/2003 | 31.05.1997 | 01.06.1997 |
| 4 | 24324/2003 | 31.07.1995 | 01.08.1995 |
| 5 | 24325/2003 | 30.06.1996 | 01.07.1996 |
Issues for Consideration
Whether a Government servant who retires on the last working day of the month is entitled to the annual increment due on the first day of the succeeding month for pension and gratuity purposes?
Whether a retired Government servant is entitled to revised DA rates effective from the first day of the month following their retirement?
Analysis & Findings
1. Entitlement to Annual Increment Post-Retirement
Fundamental Rules (FR) and Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, were examined.
FR 17 states that an officer ceases to draw pay and allowances upon ceasing duties.
FR 56 mandates retirement on the last day of the month.
Rule 5(2) of the Pension Rules establishes that the last working day is the retirement date.
Article 151 of the Civil Service Regulations clarifies that increments accrue only after being earned.
Judicial Precedents: The Supreme Court in Banerjee v. Union of India addressed voluntary retirement but did not establish a precedent for increments post-retirement. The Full Bench of the CAT (Mumbai) in Venkatram Rajagopalan v. Union of India ruled that retirement occurs at midnight, making the individual a pensioner thereafter.
Conclusion: A government servant retiring on the last day of a month is not entitled to the increment due the following day, as they are no longer in service.
2. Entitlement to Revised DA
Rule 83 of the Pension Rules states that pension becomes payable from the day following cessation of service.
The Supreme Court in Banerjee ruled that a government servant retiring at midnight acquires pensioner status the following day, making them eligible for DA applicable to pensioners.
Conclusion: Retired employees are entitled to DA applicable to pensioners effective from the first day of the succeeding month.
Final Judgment
Writ Petition Nos. 24191, 24308, 24324, and 24325 of 2003 are allowed. The orders granting annual increments post-retirement are set aside.
Writ Petition No. 22042 of 2003 is partly allowed. The respondent is denied the annual increment due on 01.01.2002 but is entitled to DA at the revised rate applicable to pensioners.
No order as to costs.
Comments