Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamlesh Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 August, 2024
1 WP-20322-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 1 st OF AUGUST, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 20322 of 2024
KAMLESH KUMAR SHARMA AND ANOTHER
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Shrikant Shrivastava - Advocate for petitioners.
Shri B.D. Singh - Deputy Advocate General for respondents-State.
ORDER
Per: Sanjeev Sachdeva, Acting Chief Justice
Petitioner No.1 claims that he stood superannuated from service on
30th June, 2024 and petitioner No.2 claims that he stood superannuated from
service on 30.06.2008 and therefore, they are entitled to the benefit of annual
increment which became due to them on 1st July, 2024 and 1 st July, 2008
respectively. Reference may be had to judgment of the Supreme Court in
Director (ADMN) and HR KPTCL v. C.P. Mundinamani, 2023 SCC OnLine
SC 401, wherein the Supreme Court has held that the entitlement to receive
increment crystallises when the Government servant completes a requisite
length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding
day. The Supreme Court further held that annual increment earned on the last
day of service for rendering good service preceding one year from the date of
2 WP-20322-2024
retirement with good behaviour and efficiency was liable to be paid to the
employee.
2. Reference may also be had to circular dated 15.03.2024 issued by the
Finance Department of the State of Madhya Pradesh directing all
departments to grant annual increment to all the employees who have retired
on 30th June / 31 st December with regard to annual increment that became
payable on 1st July or 1 st January, as the case may be.
3. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that there are thousands of
employees who are covered by the circular and said circular is being
implemented and the cases are being scrutinized and processed accordingly.
4. Be that as it may, since petitioners No.1 and 2 herein superannuated
from service on 30th June, 2024 and 30 th June, 2008 respectively, they are
entitled to get the annual increment on the succeeding day of their retirement
i.e. on 1st of July, 2024 and 1 st of July, 2008 respectively along with interest
@ 7% per annum for the delayed payment. However, in view of the
judgment of the Supreme Court in Rushibhai Jagdishchandra Pathak vs.
Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 641, since there is
delay by the petitioner No.2 herein in approaching the Court, we restrict the
benefit of arrears to the petitioner No.2, who stood superannuated on
30.06.2008, to a period of three years immediately preceding the filing of the
petition.
5. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to grant the annual increment
to the petitioners No.1 and 2 herein, which became due to them on 1st of
July, 2024 and 1 st of July, 2008 respectively, with all consequential benefits.
3 WP-20322-2024
Further, it is directed that the amount accrued in favour of the petitioners on
account of annual increment be paid to them within a period of six weeks.
6. Petition is allowed in the above terms.
(SANJEEV SACHDEVA) (VINAY SARAF)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
S/
