Madhya Pradesh High Court

Pukhraj Chajed vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                                             1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                         BEFORE
                                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                                   ON THE 1 st OF MAY, 2024
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 11206 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           PUKHRAJ CHAJED S/O MISRIMAL CHAJED, AGED
                           ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED ASST.
                           TEACHER BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER JAORA
                           GANDHI COLONY JAORA DISTT. RATLAM (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI KHEN CHAND RAIKWAR, ADVOCATE.)

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

                           2.    DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER RATLAM DIST
                                 RATLAM    MADHYA   PRADESH     (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY MS. PRANJALI YAJURVEDI, PANEL LAWYER.)

                                 T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                           following:
                                                              ORDER

01. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to grant him annual increment fell due on 01.07.2023. The petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2023, after attaining the age of superannuation.

02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled on 11.04.2023 by the Supreme Court recently in the case of Director (Admn. & HR) KPTCK & Others v/s C.P. Mundinamani & Others [Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 @ SLP (C) No.6185 of 2020] reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 296, wherein it has been

held that the 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 petition is also entitled to get the said benefit.

03. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra), the

respondents are directed to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to be added with effect from 01.07.2023 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension and issue fresh Pension Payment Order (PPO) in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled for the arrears / interest.

04. With the aforesaid, Writ Petition stands allowed.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Divyansh