Haricharan Lal Shivhare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13270 MP

                                                           1
                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT GWALIOR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                                              ON THE 16 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 20097 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           HARICHARAN LAL SHIVHARE S/O LATE SHRI MOOL
                           CHAND SHIVHARE, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: RETD GOVT SERVANT R/O- KAMLAGANJ
                           IN FRONT OF NAVAGRAH TEMPLE A.B. ROAD
                           SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI VARUN KAUSHIK - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                 PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY  PUBLIC  WORKS
                                 DEPARTMENT, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
                                 N.H. NIRMAN BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    EXECUTIVE     ENGINEER PUBLIC   WORKS
                                 DEPARTM ENT P AND R, DIVISION SHIVPURI
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    EXECUTIVE   ENGINEER   PUBLIC  WORKS
                                 DEPARTM ENT NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION
                                 GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    DISTRICT    PENSION   OFFICER,   SHIVPURI
                                 DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI RAVINDRA DIXIT - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RASHID KHAN
Signing time: 18-08-2023
11:51:54 AM
                                                                2
                                                                ORDER

1. The instant petition has been preferred by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents for not extending the benefit of increment. The petitioner, who retired as Hand Pump Technician on 30-06-2008, was denied increment on the pretext that he is not entitled.

2 . Learned counsel for petitioner submits that whether a government employee retiring on 30th June of a year is entitled to avail the benefit of increment as fixed on 1st of July is being decided by the Supreme Court recently in the case of the Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs.

C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 dated 11.04.2023, wherein after considering the judgments of different High Courts including the Madhya Pradesh High Court it has been held that benefit of annual increment which is to be added on 1st of July every year shall be paid to the employee who is going to be retired on 30th June of the said year. It is further submitted that controversy is now no longer res integra. The present petitioner stood retired on 30th June, 2008, therefore, he is entitled to avail the benefit of annual increment which was to be added on 01.07.2008.

3. Learned counsel for respondent/State could not dispute the passing of said order. However, he submits that it appears that SLP arising out of judgment of Division Bench of this Court is still pending consideration before the Supreme Court.

4. Heard.

5. After going through the judgment delivered by the Apex Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra), in para 6.3 and 6.7 it appears that the view of M.P. High Court in the case of Yogendra Singh Bhadauria and ors. Vs. Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHID KHAN Signing time: 18-08-2023 11:51:54 AM

State of Madhya Pradesh has been considered in favour of employee who is retiring on 30th June of that year. Once the Apex Court has decided the controversy and found the employee entitled for the benefit of approval of entitlement to receive increment while rendering the services over a year with good behaviour and efficiency then it appears that petitioner has made out his case.

6 . Resultantly, respondents are directed to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to be added w.e.f. 01.07.2008 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension etc. and issue fresh Pension Payment Order in favour of the petitioner, if not already issued, that too within a period of three months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.

7. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE Rashid

Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHID KHAN Signing time: 18-08-2023 11:51:54 AM