Suresh Chand Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 16795 MP

                                                     1
                 IN         THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                           AT GWALIOR
                                              BEFORE
                            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                       ON THE 10 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                       WRIT PETITION No. 6300 of 2020

               BETWEEN:-
               SURESH CHAND RAWAT S/O LATE SHRI GOVIND
               PRASAD   RAWAT,  AGED     ABOUT   73 YEARS,
               OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. TEACHER R/O 10,
               DHAMTALPURA DISTT. DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....PETITIONER
               (BY SHRI NEERENDRA SHARMA- ADVOCATE)

               AND
               1.          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                           PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF SCHOOL
                           EDUCATION,  VALLABH   BHAWAN   BHOPAL
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

               2.          THE DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
                           (DPI), GAUTAM NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

               3.          DISTRICT  EDUCATION           OFFICER,    DATIA
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

               4.          DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER, D A T I A DISTT.
                           DATIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
               (BY SHRI NITIN GOYAL- PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE)

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

Signature Not VerifiedThe present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD been preferred being aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary action on the part of Signing time: 11-10-2023 11:01:26 AM

the respondents/authorities while not granting the benefit of one increment w.e.f. 01.07.2009 as the petitioner was superannuated on 30.06.2009.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance in the matter of T h e Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani and Ors. reported in Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 in SLP (c) No.6185/2020 dated 11.04.2023, whereby this controversy has been put to rest and has been directed that even the retired employees would be entitled for grant of benefit of one increment w.e.f. 01.07.2009 even if the person has superannuated on 30.06.2009 This fact has not been controverted by Shri Nitin Goyal - Panel Lawyer.

In light of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, this petition is disposed of in similar terms and the respondents are, therefore, directed to revise the pension which is being granted to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE ms/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 11-10-2023 11:01:26 AM