R.K. Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 9587 MP

                                                               1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                                                   ON THE 26 th OF JUNE, 2023
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 13761 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           R.K. JAIN S/O LATE SHRI DHANNALAL JAIN, AGED
                           ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED R/O 259/2
                           SUPERMARKET JABALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI SIDDHANT JAIN - ADVOCATE )

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                                 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
                                 FINANCE R/O VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    CHIEF   ENGINEER     WATER  RESOURCE
                                 D EPARTM EN T VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    CHIEF  SECRETARY    WATER   RESOURCE
                                 DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SMT. GULAB KALI PATEL - GOVERNMENT 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 30.06.2014 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANOJ NAIR Signing time: 27-06-2023 11:00:17

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 30.06.2016.

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)]

3. 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 which was to be added with effect from 01.07.2014 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.

4. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE mn

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANOJ NAIR Signing time: 27-06-2023 11:00:17