Dinesh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 3603 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dinesh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2024

Author: Pranay Verma

Bench: Pranay Verma

                                            1
              IN         THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                     AT INDORE
                                         BEFORE
                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                ON THE 7 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                WRIT PETITION No. 2513 of 2024

             BETWEEN:-
             DINESH KUMAR S/O LATE MANGILAL SHARMA, AGED
             ABOUT    71  YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETD. GOVT.
             EMPLOYEE, R/O HOUSE NO. 450, WARD NO. 20, TEHSIL
             DALODA BHAUGARH DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA
             PRADESH)

                                                                   .....PETITIONER
             (BY SHRI HARDIK MAHESHWARI - ADVOCATE)

             AND
             1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M.P. GOVT. SCHOOL
                     EDUCATION DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN
                     BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

             2.      STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     COM M ISSIONER M.P. GOVERNMENT PUBLIC
                     EDUCATION    DIRECTORATE, NEAR CHETAK
                     BRIDGE GAUTAM NAGAR, BHOPAL (MADHYA
                     PRADESH)

             3.      STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, EDUCATION
                     DEPARTMENT,     SUBHASHAN     BHAVAN
                     MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

             4.      STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     DISTRICT TREASURY   OFFICER SUBHASHAN
                     BHAVAN MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

             5.      STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     DISTRICT  PENSION   OFFICER SUBHASHAN
                     BHAVAN MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHAILESH
MAHADEV SUKHDEVE                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
Signing time: 2/7/2024
6:49:01 PM       (BY MS. PRANJALI YAJURVEDI - P.L. FOR STATE)
                                                       2
                         This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
              following:
                                                       ORDER

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief (s) :-

"A. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the respondents to pay the annual increment fell due on 1/7/2012 to the petitioner.

B. To direct the respondents to revise the pension and other monetary benefits taking into account, the above mentioned one increment in the pay scale of the petitioner and grant the arrears

and other benefits, after such increment is added to the pay scale of the petitioner and C. To direct the respondent to grant the interest at the rate of 8% P.A. on the due amount from the date of the entitlement tot he actual payment of such amount and D. To grant any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation in favour of the petitioner."

2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner stood retired on 30.06.2014, whereas the next increment was payable from 01.07.2016 which has not been paid. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the judgment dated 15.09.2017 passed by the Madras High Court in the case of P. Ayyamperumal vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Signature NotTribunal Verified & Others passed in W.P.No. 15732/2017 was upheld by the Signed by: SHAILESH MAHADEV SUKHDEVE Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.(s) 22283/2018. Review Petition Signing time: 2/7/2024 6:49:01 PM

No.1731/2019 was also dismissed by order dated 02.08.2019. Further, the Division Bench (Principal Seat) of this Court in the case of State of MP & Others vs. Rajendra Prasad Tiwari (Writ Appeal No.363/2020) by judgment dated 06.03.2020, has dismissed the writ appeal filed by the State and has held that the employee retiring on 30th June of a particular year is also entitled for the increment which was payable from 1st of July of the said year. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner has retired on 30.06.2014, but the increment which was payable from 01.07.2014, has not been paid and accordingly, he is entitled for the arrears as well as for re-fixation of his pension.

3. Per contra, the petition is opposed by the counsel for the respondent/State on the ground that in view of the facts and grounds as stated by the petitioner in the petition, he is not entitled for any relief.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the available facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the pension of the petitioner be re- fixed after adding increment which was payable from 01.07.2014. Since the petitioner is found to be entitled for increment which was payable from 01.07.2014, therefore, the arrears shall carry interest @ 6% per annum till the final payment is made.

5. With aforesaid observations, this petition is finally disposed off.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE SS/-