Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sitaram Jalandare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 October, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-IND:29036
1 WP-30063-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 4 th OF OCTOBER, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 30063 of 2024
SITARAM JALANDARE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kanishq Shrivastava - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Sudeep Bhargava - Deputy Advocate General for the respondent / State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Rusia
The petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the benefit of annual increment
w.e.f. 01.07.2016 along with arrears and interest. The petitioner retired from
service on 30.06.2016 and all the terminal benefits were given to him / her by the
respondents. Now he / she is claiming the annual increment w.e.f. 1 st of July of
that year, in light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court of India in the case
o f The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Others v/s C.P. Mundinamani &
Others reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 , whereby the benefit of annual
increment fell due on 1st July of every year has been directed to be given to all the
Government employees who retired on 30th June of the relevant year.
02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petitioner is
also entitled to get the said benefit of the annual increment which became payable
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-IND:29036
2 WP-30063-2024
to him on 1 st July with arrears and interest.
03. The learned State counsel appearing for the respondents/State is not
disputing the entitlement of the petitioner for the grant of annual increment w.e.f.
01.07.2016, but objects to the payment of arrears and interest from 2016 as there is
a huge delay in filling the Writ Petition before this Court. Learned State counsel
has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rushibhai
Jagdishbhai Pathak v/s Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation reported in 2022 SCC
OnLine SC 641, in which the arrears and interest for three years before the date of
filing of the Writ Petition has been granted to the writ petitioner due to
approaching the High Court with the delay.
04. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the rival parties and taking
note of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of C.P.
Mundinamani & Rushibhai Jagdishbhai Pathak (supra), this petition is allowed,
by directing the respondents to grant the benefit of annual increment which was to
be added with effect from 01.07.2016 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 be
entitled to arrears with interest only for three years before the date of filing of the
present writ petition.
05. Writ Petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Tej
