Pradeep Kumar Saxena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 10002 MP

                                                     1
                          IN    THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                            AT JABALPUR
                                                  BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                                            ON THE 3 rd OF JULY, 2023
                                         WRIT PETITION No. 14897 of 2023

                         BETWEEN:-
                         PRADEEP KUMAR SAXENA S/O SHRI BAPULAL SAXENA,
                         AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED SUB
                         ENGINEER 253, BHARAT NAGAR DISTRICT- BHOPAL
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                         (BY SHRI ANSHUL TIWARI - ADVOCATE )

                         AND
                         1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                               PRINCIPALSECRETARY    DIPARTMENT     OF
                               FINANCE BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                               PRINCIPAL      SECRETARY     GENERAL
                               ADMINISTRATION     DEPARTMENT VALLABH
                               BHAWAN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         3.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                               PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY, PUBLIC   HEALTH
                               ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         4.    ENGINEER    IN    CHIEF PUBLIC  HEALTH
                               ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         5.    CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING
                               DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         6.    EXECUTIVE     ENGINEER PUBLIC   HEALTH
                               ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         7.    DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER B HOPAL BHOPAL
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRADYUMNA
BARVE
Signing time: 7/4/2023
11:03:58 AM
                                                                2
                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI LALIT JOGLEKAR - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

                                This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                                ORDER

By the instant petition, the petitioner is claiming that although he stood

retired on 30.06.2017 and the annual increment was to be added on 1st of July of that year, but he was not granted the said benefit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled by the Supreme Court recently in Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 (The Director {Admn. and HR KPTCL and Ors Vs.

C.P. Mundinamani & Ors) wherein it has been held that benefit of annual

increment which was to be added on 1st of July every year shall be paid to the

employee who got retired on 30th of June of the said year, therefore the present petitioner is also entitled to get the said benefit.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly inasmuch as, accordingly to the petitioner's own showing he was superannuated way back on 30.06.2017.

4. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, firstly the benefits to the petitioner cannot be declined inasmuch as, the extension of benefit of increments is recurring cause of action having direct nexus with the pecuniary benefits for which, the petitioner is entitled. [Please See: M.R. Gupta vs. Union of India (1995 5 SCC 628)]

5. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra), this petition is allowed, directing the respondents to grant the benefit of annual increment Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRADYUMNA BARVE Signing time: 7/4/2023 11:03:58 AM

which was to be added with effect from 01.07.2017 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension and issue fresh PPO in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of submitting copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE PB

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRADYUMNA BARVE Signing time: 7/4/2023 11:03:58 AM