Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramesh Prasad Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:2968
1 WP-39279-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 21st OF JANUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 39279 of 2024
RAMESH PRASAD SONI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
None for the petitioner.
Shri A. S. Baghel - GA for the respondents / State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed
seeking following reliefs:-
7.1. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to extend the benefit of annual
increment to the petitioner which is due on 1st July
2013 after the retirement on 30th June 2013 and
respondents be further directed to pay all the retiral
benefits to the petitioner by adding the benefit of one
annual increment with arrears and interest within the
stipulated time period.
7.2. Any other relief which deem fit and proper
looking to facts and circumstances of the case may also
be awarded in favour of the petitioner with cost of the
petition.
2. Case of the petitioner is that he stood retired on 30.6.2013 and in
the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of The
Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Others vs. C. P. Mundinamani &
Others, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401, he is entitled to get the
benefit of annual increment fell due on 1st of July of every year with arrears
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:2968
2 WP-39279-2024
and interest.
3. The aforesaid issue was considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Director (ADMN) and HR KPTCL v. C.P. Mundinamani reported
in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 which has subsequently been modified /
clarified by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 06.09.2024 passed in
Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition
(C) No.4722 of 2021 (Union of India and anr. v. M. Siddaraj), wherein it has
been held as under :
"It is stated that the Review Petition in Diary No.
36418/2024 filed by the Union of India is pending.
The issue raised in the present applications requires
consideration, insofar as the date of applicability of the
judgment dated 11.04.2023 in Civil Appeal No.
2471/2023, titled "Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL
and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and others", to third
parties is concerned.
We are informed that a large number of fresh writ
petitions have been filed.
To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an
interim order we direct that:
(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect
to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment,
that is, the pension by taking into account one increment
will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced
pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be
paid.
(b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and
succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment
will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an
enhanced pension by taking one increment would have
to be paid.
(c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the
judgment has not attained finality, and cases where an
appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by
the appellate court.
(d) In case any retired employee has filed any
application for intervention/impleadment in r any other
writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the
enhanced pension by including one increment will be
payable from the month in which the application for
intervention/impleadment was filed.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:2968
3 WP-39279-2024
This interim order will continue till further orders of
this Court. However, no person who has already
received an enhanced pension including arrears, will be
affected by the directions in (a), (c) and (d).
Re-list in the week commencing 04.11.2024."
4. The case of petitioner is squarely covered by the order passed by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra).
5. In view whereof, this petition is disposed off in terms of the
clarification issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated
06.09.2024 in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra) . The Authorities are directed to
examine the case of petitioner in terms of order passed by Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra) and extend the benefits, if any,
within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
order. In case if petitioner is not found entitled for grant of any benefit, then
speaking order be passed and the same be communicated to the petitioner
within aforesaid period.
6. In above terms, the petition stands disposed off finally. No order as
to costs.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
JP
