Maheshkumar Hariprasad Dave vs Principal Secretary, Panchayat, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5610 Guj

     C/SCA/6009/2020                             JUDGMENT DATED: 28/06/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6009 of 2020

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
==========================================================
1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
      to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
      of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question
      of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
      of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                 MAHESHKUMAR HARIPRASAD DAVE
                             Versus
    PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT, RURAL HOUSING AND RURAL
                   DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. JAIMIN R DAVE(7022) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS HIRVA R DAVE(10742) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
SHIVAM D PARIKH(9477) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR. KURVEN DESAI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                             Date : 28/06/2022
                             ORAL JUDGMENT

1 Rule returnable forthwith. Mr.Kurven Desai, learned Assistant

Government Pleader, waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents

- State.

C/SCA/6009/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/06/2022

2 The prayer in the petition is that the petitioners are entitled to the

last increment of their service which falls due on 01 st July though they

have retired on 30th June.

3 Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioners are retired State

Government employees who had worked in different departments of the

State and have retired from service on 30th June of different years, and

therefore, could not get the benefit of the increment falling due on 01 st of

July on the date subsequent to their retirement.

4 The issue is now decided by a Division Bench of this Court

rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 868 of 2021 dated 27.04.2022. The

Division Bench of this Court has referred to various decisions of the

Delhi High Court and of the High Court of Madras and confirmed the

order of the learned Single Judge.

5 Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed

to grant the benefits to the petitioners of last increment of their service

which fell due on 01st July, the date next to their date of retirement of 30th

June of their respective years. Pension benefits may be revised

accordingly within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy

of this order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) Bimal