Hotam Singh Harshana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 20990 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hotam Singh Harshana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                                              1                              WP-21883-2024
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                       BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                                          &
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
                                                 ON THE 2 nd OF AUGUST, 2024
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 21883 of 2024
                                              HOTAM SINGH HARSHANA
                                                      Versus
                                     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Sanjeev Tiwari, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
                                  Shri Shyam Prakash Jain, learned counsel for the Respondent.

                                                               ORDER

Per: Justice Vivek Rusia

1. By the instant petition, the petitioner is claiming that although he stood retired on 30.06.2022 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 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. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by

2 WP-21883-2024 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 01.07.2022 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. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of his entitlement i.e. 1/7/2022 till the date of actual payment.

4. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.

                                  (VIVEK RUSIA)                              (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
                                      JUDGE                                          JUDGE


                          ar