Krishna vs Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 20124 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Krishna vs Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut ... on 30 November, 2023

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                         1
                            IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                           ON THE 30 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 29383 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    KRISHNA S/O SHRI MANKA MAHALE, AGED
                                 ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED R/O
                                 WARD NO. 9 PANSEMAL DISTT. BARWANI
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    LAXMAN S/O SHRI NATTHE JADHAV, AGED
                                 ABOUT   65   YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED
                                 VILLAGE BALVADI TEH. VERLA DIST. BARWANI
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    DHANRAJ S/O SHRI SITARAM DESHLE, AGED
                                 ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RET. BHATI TEH.
                                 PANSEMAL DIST. BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    PANDIT BAGUL S/O SHRI SUPDU BAGUL, AGED
                                 ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RET. MALFA,
                                 TEH. AND DIST. BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    SHANTILAL S/O SHRI JAGANLAL GANVANI, AGED
                                 ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RET. 186, NIWALI
                                 BUJUGRA TEH. PANSEMAL DIST. BARWANI
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                           (SHRI KAILASH CHANDRA YADAV - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    MADHYA PRADESH PASCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT
                                 VITRAN CO. LTD. ADDITIONAL SECRETARY
                                 G.P.H. COMPOUND POLO GROUND INDORE
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HR AND A)
                                 PASCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT COMPANY LIMITED
                                 POLOGROUND INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    SUPERINTENDENT              ENGINEER MADHYA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 30-11-2023
17:50:28
                                                       2
                                 PRADESH PASCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT VITARAN
                                 COMPANY    LIMITED CITY CIRCLE CIRCLE
                                 BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS


                                  T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                           following:
                                                                  ORDER

B y the instant petition, the petitioners are claiming that although they stood retired and the annual increment was to be added on 1st of July of that year, but they were not granted the said benefit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 KPTCK 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 petitioners are also entitled to get the said benefit.

3. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by Supreme Court in case of C.P. Mundinamni (Supra), this petition is allowed, directing the respondents to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to be added with effect from 01.07.2015/2016 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension and issue fresh PPO in favour of the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of submitting copy of this Court.

4. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)

JUDGE Sourabh