Pradeep Kumar Pandey (Age About 60 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 7461 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Pradeep Kumar Pandey (Age About 60 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 December, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                             2025:JHHC:36117


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                               WP(S) No.6191 of 2022
                                          -----
             1. Pradeep Kumar Pandey (Age about 60 years) S/o Sri
             Gunjeshwari Pandey resident of Village Parsudih, Church Road,
             Butru Bagan, P.O & P.S. - Tatanagar, District - East Singhbhum
             (Jharkhand).
             2. Mithilesh Kumar Prasad (Age about 60 years) S/o Late Baldeo
             Prasad resident of House No. 25, Cross Road No. 3, Road No. 1,
             Adarsh Colony, P.O. & P.S. Mango, Jamshedpur, District East
             Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
             3. Meyalal Sardar (Age about 61 years) S/o Late Lakhi Charan
             Sardar resident of Village Palidih, PO Rasunchopa, P.S. Kowali,
             District East Singhbhum (Jamshedpur).
                                                          ... Petitioner(s).
                                     Versus
             1. The State of Jharkhand.
             2. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S.
             Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
             3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Kolhan Division,
             Chaibasa, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Jamshedpur District East
             Singhbhum (Jharkhand).,
             4. The District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum,
             P.O. & P.S. Jamshedpur, District - East Singhbhum, (Jharkhand).
             5. The District Education Officer, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S.
             Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand).
                                                         ... Respondent(s).

             CORAM      :      SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kr. Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr. SC-II .........

21 /03.12.2025: Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners are praying for the benefit of one increment. It is submitted that all the petitioners superannuated on 30th June in the respective years and have not been paid one increment which they are entitled to.

3. The issue in respect of giving one increment to an employee who retires on 30th June and 31st December has already been set at rest by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023 titled "The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors.". It has been held

2025:JHHC:36117

that the person who retired on 30th June or 31st July will get the benefit of one increment.

4. Considering the aforesaid judgment and since the petitioners had retired on 30th June of the respective year, the petitioners are also entitled to get the benefit of one increment. The same should be granted to the petitioners and the consequential benefit should also be granted within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

5. This writ petition is disposed of.

(ANANDA SEN, J.) 03.12.2025 Tanuj/CP-2

Uploaded on 04.12.2025