Karamlal Dansena vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4999 Chatt

                                                             Page 1 of 2

                                                                  NAFR

            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                        WPS No. 5282 of 2022

      Karamlal Dansena, S/o Shri Sadairam Dansena, Aged About 66
      Years, Retired Head Master Govt. Middle School Purena Block -
      Kharsia, District - Raigarh, Presently Resident of Village - Post
      Banglapara Chakradhar Nagar, Block- Raigarh District- Raigarh
      (C.G.)
                                                         ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.    State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary School Education
      Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.)
2.    The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi
      Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.)
3.    The Secretary, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal
      Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.)
4.    The District Education Officer, District - Raigarh (C.G.)
5.    The Accountant General Chhattisgarh Raipur (C.G.)
6.    The Joint Director, Treasury Accounts & Pension Bilaspur (C.G.)
7.    The Block Education Officer Block - Kharsia, District- Raigarh
      (C.G.)
                                                        ---- Respondents

For Petitioners : Mr. Dhani Ram Patel, Advocate. For State : Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

Order on Board

04.08.2022

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for grant of the benefit of one annual increment while fixing pension and other retiral dues payable to the petitioner.

2. According to counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has retired from service on 30.06.2018. Since he has retired from service with effect from 30.06.2018, he would be entitled for the annual increment that would be payable to him for the period between

01.06.2017 to 30.06.2018 as the date of annual increment payable to the petitioner is 1st of July. Therefore, according to the counsel for the petitioner, while quantifying pension and other retiral dues, the annual increment which the petitioner became entitled for having worked till 30.06.2018 has to be added to the last pay and other allowances also.

3. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, let the respondents authorities consider the case of the petitioner for grant of one annual increment to the last salary which the petitioner has received for the purpose of quantifying pension and other retiral dues. While deciding the claim of the petitioner, the respondents shall take into consideration the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in the case of P. Ayyamperumal Vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and others1. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Arun