Gulab Ramrao Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6377 Bom

                                        1


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      922 WRIT PETITION NO. 7363 OF 2023


                                GULAB RAMRAO JADHAV

                                        VERSUS

                 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                         ...
                   Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Murge Estling S.
                     AGP for Respondents : Mr. S.K. Tambe
                                         ...

                                 CORAM      : MANGESH S. PATIL &
                                              SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 05 JULY 2023

PER COURT (PER : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) :

Heard learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of

this petition.

2. The petitioner is claiming notional increment which is

payable on the 1st July and the consequential benefits.

3. The petitioner was appointed as an 'Assistant Teacher' on

01 August 1988. He attained the age of superannuation on 30 June

2013. He claims that he is entitled to notional increment which was

falling due after the superannuation.

4. The issue is well settled in the following judgments :

i. P. Ayyamperumal Versus The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal and others, decided by Division Bench of Madras High Court on 15 September 2007 in Writ Petition No. 15732 of 2017;

ii. Prakash Tulshiram Chaudhari Versus Versus State of Maharashtra and others, decided by the Division Bench by order dated 24 June 2021, in Writ Petition No. 6396 of 2020;

iii. Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and others Versus C.P. Mundinamani and others, AIRONLINE 2023 SC 275.

4. There is no dispute that he has rendered service for a year

preceding the superannuation. The petitioner has earned the

increment. He is entitled to annual increment.

5. Learned AGP refers to circular dated 28 June 2023, to

restrict the claim of the revision of pension and its arrears for three

years preceding the date of superannuation. We deem it appropriate to

restrict the consequential relief for three years preceding the date of

superannuation.

6. Therefore, we allow this petition in the following terms :

i. The respondent shall confer notional increment

and consequential benefits to the petitioner preferably

within a period of two months.

ii. The petitioner shall be entitled to the revision of

retiral benefits and the arrears for three years

preceding the date of superannuation i.e. 30 June

2013.

               iii.     No order as to costs.




 [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ]                         [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
        JUDGE                                         JUDGE




spc/