Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P.Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... vs Dr. Rajendra Prasad Pathak on 20 May, 2025
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29848-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 6 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Ayush Anubhag Govt. Lko and another
Respondent :- Dr. Rajendra Prasad Pathak
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Vinod Kumar Shukla, Rakesh Chandra Tewari
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 8 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Ayush Govt. of U.P. Lko. and another
Respondent :- Dr. Vijay Pal Singh And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Vinod Kumar Shukla
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 20 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Ayush Anubhag I Govt. Lko. and another
Respondent :- Ashok Kumar Pundir and another
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 21 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. Thru. its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Ayush Anubhag -I Govt. of U.P. Lko. and another
Respondent :- Shailendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 73 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. its Addl. Chief Secy. Ayush and another
Respondent :- Dr. Vikram Agarwal
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 109 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation and Water Resources Jal Shakti and 10 others
Respondent :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava and 3 others
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Smita Chitranshi
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 110 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources Lko and others
Respondent :- Om Narayan
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Shivam Sharma,Anil Kishore,Ram Achal Gupta
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 153 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources Deptt. Lko. and 9 others
Respondent :- Ravi Prakash and 2 others
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Amit Srivastava
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 154 of 2025
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. its Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag Lko. and 2 others
Respondent :- Dr. Devendra Nath Tripathi
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Rakesh Chandra Tewari
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 623 of 2024
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Ayush U.P. Lko. and 2 others
Respondent :- Surendra Prasad Upadhyay
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya)
With
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 634 of 2024
Appellant :- State of U.P. thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush U.P. Lko. and 3 others
Respondent :- Dr. Vinod Kumari Gupta
Counsel for Appellant :- S.C., V.P. Nag
Counsel for Respondent :- Surya Prakash
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
1. These appeals are directed against the separate orders passed by learned Single Judge in writ petitions preferred by the respondents, wherein directions have been given for grant of benefit of one annual grade increment to the respondents, who retired on 30th June/31st December in the respective years, on their superannuation.
2. The learned Single Judge, directed grant of benefit of the increment from the date the same became admissible i.e. the date of retirement, resulting in the respondents getting arrears from the date they retired. In some cases, the learned Single Judge, relying on the judgment in the case of Union of India and others v. Tarsem Singh: (2008) 8 SCC 648, restricted the arrears for the period of three years from before the date of filing of the petition.
3. The benefit of one annual grade increment to those who had retired on 30th June/31st December, was found admissible based on the judgment in The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and others v. C.P. Mundinamani and others : (2023) 14 SCC 411 which was followed in Union of India and another v. M. Siddaraj, Civil Appeal No. 3933 of 2023, decided on 19.05.2023.
4. In the case of M. Siddaraj (supra), Misc. Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 was filed by Union of India questioning the grant/demand of arrears by the successful respondents.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by order dated 06.09.2024, initially granted interim order and finally, by its order dated 20.02.2025, has directed as under:-
"We had passed the following interim order dated 06.09.2024, the operative portion of which reads 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 the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be paid.
(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."
We are inclined to dispose of the present miscellaneous applications directing that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as final directions. We are, however, of the opinion that Clause (d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires modification which shall now read as under:
"(d) In case any retired employee filed an application for intervention/impleadment/ writ petition/original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal/ High Courts/this Court, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable for the period of three years prior to the month in which the application for intervention/impleadment/writ petition/ original application was filed."
Further, clause (d) will not apply to the retired government employee who filed a writ petition/original application or an application for intervention before the Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court after the judgment in "Union of India & Anr. v. M. Siddaraj", as in such cases, clause (a) will apply.
Recording the aforesaid, the miscellaneous applications are disposed of.
We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment has already been made, including arrears, such amount paid will not be recovered. It will be open to any person aggrieved by non-compliance with the directions and the clarification of this Court, in the present order, to approach the concerned authorities in the first instance and, if required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Court, as per law.
Pending applications including all intervention/impleadment applications shall stand disposed of in terms of this order."
6. As a result of the above directions given by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respondents, who have retired prior to 01.05.2023, apparently now would be entitled to the enhanced pension w.e.f. 01.05.2023 and would be entitled to arrears for the period starting from 01.05.2023 only, irrespective of the directions given by the learned Single Judge.
7. In view of the directions/clarifications issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra), the present special appeals are disposed of in the light and with similar directions as given by Hon'ble Supreme Court.
8. The appellants would do the needful in terms of the directions given by learned Single Judge as modified by this order, within a period of two months.
9. It is made clear that the Government Order dated 12.06.2024, issued by the appellants-State with regard to giving benefit of one increment to those who have retired on 30th June/31st December, would not affect the cases of the respondents insofar as their claims for arrears in terms of the directions issued by the learned Single Judge/hereinbefore is concerned.
Order Date :- 20.5.2025
Sandeep/Rakesh
(Jaspreet Singh, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
