Subhash S/O Devendra Bangre And ... vs State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8397 Bom

      2-WP5843.22-Judgment                                                1/5


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 5843 OF 2022

1.      Subhash S/o Devendra Bangre, Aged about           Petitioners
        59 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o. Shri
        Aher's Wada, Behind Katyani Hospital,
        Balaji Ward, Chandrapur, Tq. & Distt.
        Chandrapur
2.      Kishor S/o Vitthalsingh Yeotikar, Aged
        about 60 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o
        Ekvira Niwas, Jagganathbaba Nagar,
        Chandrapur, Tq. & District Chandrapur
        442401.
3.      Ashok S/o Shivnath Labhane, aged about
        60 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o
        Nirman Nagar, Tukum, Ward No.1,
        Chandrapur, Tq. & District Chandrapur.
4.      Bhimrao S/o Vishwanath Soge, aged about
        61 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o Flat
        No.404, Heritage Tower, Jakir Hussain
        Ward, Near Swimming Pool, Ballarpur, Tq.
        Ballarpur, District Chandrapur - 01.
5.      Satish S/o Laxmanrao Dharme, aged about
        61 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o Plot
        No.15, "Parijat", Shri Sant Namdev Nagar,
        Manewada Road, Nagpur-24.
6.      Sau. Roopabai W/o Gangadin Mogre, aged
        about 64 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o
        Khutala,    MIDC,      Police     Colony,
        Chandrapur, Tq. & District Chandrapur.
7.      Sheshrao S/o Ramchandra Gurav, aged
        about 64 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o
        47, Venuevan Society, Narendra Nagar,
        Nagpur-15.

      KHUNTE


     ::: Uploaded on - 18/08/2023            ::: Downloaded on - 19/08/2023 08:54:46 :::
       2-WP5843.22-Judgment                                                          2/5



8.      Arvind Laxmanrao Uplenchwar, aged
        about 64 years, Occupation : Retired, R/o
        Nirman Nagar, Tukum, Ward No.1,
        Chandrapur, Tq. & District Chandrapur.

                                    -Versus-

1.      The State of Maharashtra, through its                       Respondents
        Secretary,    Finance     Department,
        Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2.      The State of Maharashtra, through its
        Principal Secretary, (Law & Judiciary)
        Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
3.      The Principal District & Sessions Judge,
        Chandrapur - through its Registrar,
        District Court, Chandrapur, Tq. & District
        Chandrapur.


      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Mr. S.N.Singh, counsel for the petitioners.
              Mr. M.K.Pathan, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
               Mr. Abhay Sambre, counsel for respondent No.3.
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


                               CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND
                                       M.W.CHANDWANI, JJ.
                               CLOSED ON : 11TH AUGUST, 2023
                               PRONOUNCED ON: 18TH AUGUST, 2023


      JUDGMENT (Per : M. W. Chandwani, J.)

Heard.

      KHUNTE



  2-WP5843.22-Judgment                                                       3/5

2. The grievance in the present petition is the refusal of

respondents to grant the benefit of one annual increment,

which fell due on 30th June to the petitioners, who

superannuated on 30th June of their respective years.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners

submits and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents

fairly agrees that the issue is squarely covered by several

decisions of this Court, which have relied on the decision of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 2471/2023 (The

Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C. P.

Mundinamani and Ors., dated 11/04/2023.

4. Since the issue of entitlement of annual increment of

the petitioners is squarely covered by the decision of the

Supreme Court in C.P.Mundinamani (supra), wherein it has

been held that a government servant is entitled to the benefit of

the annual increment on the eventuality of having served for a

specified period of one year with good conduct efficiently,

merely because, the employee has retired on the very next day,

KHUNTE

2-WP5843.22-Judgment 4/5

he cannot be denied the annual increment, which he has earned

and/or entitled to for rendering the service with good conduct

efficiently in the preceding one year. On the same line, the

petitioners are also entitled for one annual increment. We find

that equities can be met by declaring that all the petitioners

shall be entitled to the increment, which fell due on the 30 th

June of the year, in which the petitioners have superannuated.

The pension of the petitioners shall have to be re-fixed.

However, the re-fixation shall be notional and the petitioners

shall be entitled to the arrears in view of the re-fixation only for

the period of three years preceding the date of institution of the

petition.

5. In this view of the matter, we allow the petition and

direct the respondents to give notional annual increment to the

petitioners for having completed one full year of service on the

date of their superannuation/retirement i.e. 30th June of their

respective years and, accordingly, consequential benefits due

and payable shall be worked out by the respondents from the

KHUNTE

2-WP5843.22-Judgment 5/5

period of three years preceding the date of institution of the

petition and paid to the petitioners within a period of eight

weeks from the date of this judgment.

6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No

order as to costs.

(M.W.CHANDWANI, J) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J)

KHUNTE