Gujarat High Court
District Development Officer vs Prantij Taluka Nivrut Karmachari ... on 24 January, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/173/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 173 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13201 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 173 of 2025
==========================================================
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
Versus
PRANTIJ TALUKA NIVRUT KARMACHARI MANDAL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ARCHANA R ACHARYA(2475) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
MR APURVA A DAVE(3777) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 24/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. It is noticed by us that the employee at Sr. No.185 - Smt.
Champaben Jivabhai Parmar is not eligible for the benefit of one
increment as per the Government Resolution dated 18.12.2023 and
that she has not completed one year of service on the respective
post so as to get the benefits of one increment on completion of one
year service.
2. It is submitted that the present order is confined to the
employees at Sr. Nos.117, 119, 120, 122, 125, 126, 129, 131, 133
to 137, 139, 140, 158, 163, 166, 168, 169, 174 to 176, as they are
the employees working with the District Panchayat.
3. It is an established fact that there are various Writ Petitions
filed by numerous employees after the judgment was rendered by
the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.10308 of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/173/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/01/2025
undefined
2021 dated 11.08.2021. It is also not in dispute that in various High
Courts of the country, such issue about grant of one increment
accruing on 1st July to its employees and who had retired on 30 th
June, was raised and examined by different High Courts. Ultimately,
the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Director (Admn.
and HR) KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others, dated
11.04.2023, disposed of the Special Leave Petition on identical
issue.
4. It appears that thereafter, a review application was filed
before the Supreme Court on the very said judgment being Misc.
Civil Application (Diary) No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition
(Civil) No.4722 of 2021. By the order dated 06.09.2024, the
Supreme Court again clarified with regard to entitlement of one
increment to such employees who are similarly situated to the
opponent.
5. The Supreme Court has held thus:-
"The issue raised in the present applications requires consideration,
insofar as the date of applicability of the judgment dated 11.04.2023 in
Civil Appeal No. 2471/2023, titled "Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL
and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others", to third parties is
concerned.
We are informed that a large number of fresh writ petitions have been
filed.
To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an interim order
we direct that:
(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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/173/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/01/2025
undefined
(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.
This interim order will continue till further orders of this Court.
However, no person who has already received an enhanced pension
including arrears, will be affected by the directions in (a), (c) and (d)."
6. In the meantime, the State Government, on dismissal of the
Special Leave Petition, had also framed policy regulating grant of
one increment in line of the order passed by the Supreme Court.
However, when the recent order dated 06.09.2024 was passed by
the Supreme Court clarifying its earlier order, the State Government
has withdrawn the policy.
7. It is also not in dispute that the learned Single Judge as well
as the Division Bench have placed reliance on the judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra) for taking
similar view.
8. In light of subsequent development, the State Government
has filed the present Letters Patent Appeal on the order passed by
the learned Single Judge. We have noticed that there are numerous
Letters Patent Appeals filed either by the State Government or by
various bodies of the State Government on the basis of the order
passed by the Supreme Court. In fact, in some matters, the learned
advocates appearing for the employees have consented for passing
orders in Letters Patent Appeals in line of the order dated
06.09.2024 passed by the Supreme Court in the review application
in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra).
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/173/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/01/2025
undefined
9. The aforesaid fact is not denied by the employees that in
identical facts and on the similar judgments, this Court has
entertained the Letters Patent Appeals. For brevity, we are not
inclined to refer to the numbers of such Appeals.
10. Thus, in order to see that uniformity is maintained in all such
cases and all the employees are treated at par with the directions
issued by the Supreme Court, we are inclined to dispose of the
Letters Patent Appeal in conformity with the order dated
06.09.2024 passed by the Supreme Court in Misc. Civil Application
(Diary) No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.4722 of
2021.
11. Tus, the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the order
passed by the Supreme Court. The date of conferring of the benefit
of one increment shall be extended to the employees in light of the
aforesaid order.
12. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms qua
employees at Sr. Nos.117, 119, 120, 122, 125, 126, 129, 131, 133
to 137, 139, 140, 158, 163, 166, 168, 169, 174 to 176. As a
sequel, the connected Civil Application also stands disposed of.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik/14
