Ramesh Chandra Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15796 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ramesh Chandra Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

                                                      1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT GWALIOR
                                                   BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                             ON THE 28 th OF MAY, 2024
                                          WRIT PETITION No. 14741 of 2024

                          BETWEEN:-
                          RAMESH CHANDRA JATAV S/O LATE SHRI BABU LAL
                          JATAV, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                          ASSISTANT GRADE II (RETIRED) FARMER WELFARE
                          AND AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT DEPT DISTRICT
                          MORENA R/O SINGAI BASTI NEAR DILLI WALI PULIA
                          MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI BRIJESH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY  GOVT  OF  M.P
                                MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    DIRECTOR    FARMER     WELFARE    AND
                                AGRICULTURE    DEPARTMENT VINDHYACHAL
                                BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    DIVISIONAL    JOINT  DIRECTOR FARMER
                                WELFARE AND AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT
                                CHAMBAL    DIVISION MORENA   (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          4.    DEPUTY DIRECTOR FARMER WELFARE AND
                                AGRICULTURE        DEPARTMENT CHAMBAL
                                DIVISION MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          5.    DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER DISTRICT PENSION
                                O F F I C E , DISTRICT MORENA ,  (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                            .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI SOHIT MISHRA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETU
SHASHANK
Signing time: 5/29/2024
6:25:12 PM
                                                              2
                                Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                               ORDER

The instant petition has been preferred by petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents for not extending the benefit of increment. The Petitioner, who retired on 30.06.2020, was denied increment on the pretext that he is not entitled.

2 . Learned counsel for petitioner submits that whether a government employee retiring on 30th June of a year is entitled to avail the benefit of increment as fixed on 1st of July, is decided by the Supreme Court recently in

the case of the Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 dated 11.04.2023, wherein after considering the judgments of different High Courts including the Madhya Pradesh High Court it has been held that benefit of annual increment which is to be added on 1st of July every year shall be paid to the employee who is going to be retired on 30th June of the said year. It is further submitted that controversy is now no longer res integra. The petitioner stood retired on 30th June, 2020, therefore, he is entitled to avail the benefit of annual increment which was to be added on 01.07.2020. The said aspect has also been dealt with by the Full Bench of this Court also in the case of Ratanlal Rathore Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others (Writ Petition No.4118 of 2020) decided on 28.07.2023.

3. Learned counsel for respondent/State could not dispute the passing of said order. However, he submits that it appears that SLP arising out of judgment of Division Bench of this Court is still pending consideration before the Supreme Court.

4. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereto.

5. After going through the judgment delivered by the Apex Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra ), in para 6.3 and 6.7 it appears that the view of M.P. High Court in the case of Yogendra Singh Bhadauria and ors. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh has been considered in favour of employee who is retiring on 30th June of that year. Once the Apex Court as well as Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ratanlal Rathore (supra) has decided the controversy and found the employee entitled for the benefit of approval of entitlement to receive increment while rendering the services over a year with good behaviour and efficiency then it appears that petitioner has made out his case.

6 . Resultantly, respondents are directed to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to be added w.e.f. 01.07.2020 and recalculate the benefit of retiral dues and pension etc. and issue fresh pension payment order in favour of the petitioner, if not already issued, that too within a period of three months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.

7. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu