Surendra Kumar Parmar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2884 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Surendra Kumar Parmar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2025

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:913




                                                                 1                              WP-35048-2024
                              IN         THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                            BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT,
                                                         CHIEF JUSTICE
                                                               &
                                              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                                    ON THE 15 th OF JANUARY, 2025
                                                   WRIT PETITION No. 35048 of 2024
                                                  SURENDRA KUMAR PARMAR
                                                           Versus
                                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                                   Ms. Archana Sharma - advocate for the petitioner.
                                   Shri Sudeep Bhargava - Dy A. G. for respondent/State.

                                                                  ORDER

Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, Chief Justice Petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition claiming the

benefit of annual increment w.e.f. 1 st July 2024 along with arrears and interest. The petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2024 and all the terminal benefits were given to him by the respondents. Now petitioner is claiming the annual increment w.e.f. 1st of July of that year, in light of the judgment passed by the

Supreme Court of India in the case of The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL 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 petitioner is also entitled to get the said benefit of the annual increment which became payable to

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:913

2 WP-35048-2024 him/her on 1st July with arrears and interest. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled by the Supreme Court recently in the case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra) wherein it has been held that 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 petitioner is also entitled to get the said benefit.

03. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra) , the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation within a period of 15 days from today before the competent authority for grant of annual

increment to be added on 1st July and to recalculate the retiral dues and pension

and issuance of fresh PPO and if such representation is submitted, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of submitting the representation. If the authority finds that the petitioner is entitled for the same, the benefit shall be given to him/her and if the petitioner is not found entitled, the authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order.

04. Accordingly, Writ Petition stands disposed of to the extent indicated above.

                               (SURESH KUMAR KAIT)                                     (VIVEK RUSIA)
                                   CHIEF JUSTICE                                           JUDGE
                           Vatan