Salauddin Mansuri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 4696 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Salauddin Mansuri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 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 17 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                WRIT PETITION No. 3967 of 2024

             BETWEEN:-
             SALAUDDIN MANSURI S/O ABDUL GANI, AGED ABOUT
             66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE,
             R/O NEEM CHOWK DUTTA KI GHATI KUMHAARVADA
             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 SUSHASHAN BHAVAN MANDSAUR
                     (MADHYA PRADESH)

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

             5.      STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                     DISTRICT  PENSION   OFFICER SUSHASHAN
                     BHAVAN MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

Signature Not Verified
                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
Signed by: SHAILESH
MAHADEV SUKHDEVE (MS. HARSHLATA SONI - P.L. FOR RESPONDENTS/STATE)
Signing time: 2/19/2024
5:54:07 PM
                                                         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 to the 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 30.06.2019, whereas the next increment was payable from 01.07.2019 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 Tribunal & Others passed in W.P.No. 15732/2017 was upheld by the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.(s) 22283/2018. Review Petition

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 30.06.2019, but the increment which was payable from 01.07.2019, 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 01.07.2019. Since the petitioner is found to be entitled for increment which was payable from 01.07.2019, 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/-