Dinesh Kumar Pagare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12073 MP

                             1


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                 AT JABALPUR
                         BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                 ON THE 31st OF JULY, 2023
               WRIT PETITION No. 18394 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
DINESH KUMAR PAGARE S/O
LATE RAM LAL PAGARE, AGED
ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETIRED     AS     ASSISTANT
ENGINEER       IN      RURAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES OFFICE
OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RURAL
ENGINEERING    SERVICES  R/O
BEHIND POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE,
BARAPATHAR, SHAHTRI WARD,
NEAR MATRASHREE COMPLEX,
SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                             .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI P.K.SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE)

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA
      PRADESH THROUGH THE
      PRINCIPAL    SECRETARY
      PANCHAYAT AND RURAL
      DEVELOPMENT
      DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA
      VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
      (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.    THE ENGINEER IN CHIEF,
      DIRECTORATE         OF
      PANCHAYAT AND RURAL
      DEVELOPMENT
      DEPARTMENT M.P. GOVT.
      SATPURA BHAWAN, BHOPAL
      (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.    THE   CHIEF    ENGINEER,
                                   2


     RURAL      ENGINEERING
     SERVICES           AND
     DEVELOPMENT BEOHARBAG,
     JABALPUR       (MADHYA
     PRADESH)
4.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     RURAL        ENGINEERING
     SERVICES, DIVISION SEONI
     DISTRICT SEONI (MADHYA
     PRADESH)
5.   THE TREASURY OFFICER,
     DIVISION/DISTRICT PENSION
     OFFICE    SEONI   DIVISION
     DISTRICT SEONI (MADHYA
     PRADESH)
                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI NAVEEN DUBEY - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

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

By the instant petition, the petitioner is claiming that although he stood retired on 30.06.2021, 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 and 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 employees who got retired on 30th of June of the said year, therefore the present petitioner is also entitled to get the said benefit.

3. No other argument is advanced by the counsel for the petitioner.

4. 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.

5. It is directed that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of annual increment which was to be added with effect from 1st of July.

6. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to recalculate the 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.

7. With aforesaid direction, the petition stands allowed.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE HEMANT SARAF 2023.08.01 10:36:05 +05'30' HS