Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prem Shankar Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 March, 2025
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia, Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6741
1 WP-10340-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 22nd OF MARCH, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 10340 of 2025
PREM SHANKAR JATAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri D.P. Singh - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri A.K. Nirankari - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
This petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, has been filed
seeking following relief (s):-
(i) That, the Respondent be commanded to extend the
benefit of the annual increment earned for year 2020-
2021 which was due on 01/07/2021 just after the next
date of retirement, with further to revise all the
consequential benefit/terminal claims/pension of the
petitioner after extending the benefit of the annual
increment, along with further to pay 18% interest over
the same.
(ii) That, any other relief which is suitable in the facts
and circumstances of the case in favor of the petitioner
including the costs throughout may be granted.
2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner has retired on
30.06.2021, therefore, is entitled for increment which was payable to him
w.e.f. 01.07.2021. It is submitted that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6741
2 WP-10340-2025
order dated 22.04.2024 passed in the case of Manmohan Sharma Vs. The
State of M.P. and others in WP. No.10440/2024 has directed that if a person
has retired on 30th of June or 31st of December of a year then he is entitled
for grant of benefit of one increment which was to be added w.e.f. 01st of
July of that year or 01st of January of the next year. Accordingly, it is prayed
that the same benefit may be extended to petitioner.
3. Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the State.
It is submitted that Supreme Court by order dated 20.02.2025 passed in the
case of Union of India and another Vs. M. Siddaraj in Miscellaneous
Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Civil Appeal No.3933 of 2023 has
laid down certain guidelines, therefore, the relief may be granted in the light
of directions given by the Supreme Court.
4. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
5. The Supreme Court in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra) has held as
under:-
"Delay condoned.
We had passed the following interim order dated
06.09.2024, the operative portion of which reads as
under:
"(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,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6741
3 WP-10340-2025
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
Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or 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."
We are inclined to dispose of the present miscellaneous
applications directing that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the
order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as final
directions. We are, however, of the opinion that Clause
(d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires modification
which shall now read as under:
"(d) In case any retired employee filed an
application for intervention/impleadment/writ
petition/original application before the
Central Administrative Tribunal/High
Courts/this Court, the enhanced pension by
including one increment will be payable for
the period of three years prior to the month in
which the application for intervention/
impleadment/ writ petition/ original
application was filed."
Further, clause (d) will not apply to the retired
government employee who filed a writ petition/original
application or an application for intervention before the
Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court
after the judgment in "Union of India & Anr. v. M.
Siddaraj"1, as in such cases, clause (a) will apply.
Recording the aforesaid, the miscellaneous applications
are disposed of.
We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment has
already been made, including arrears, such amount paid
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6741
4 WP-10340-2025
will not be recovered.
It will be open to any person aggrieved by non-
compliance with the directions and the clarification of
this Court, in the present order, to approach the
concerned authorities in the first instance and, if
required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Court, as
per law.
Pending applications including all
intervention/impleadment applications shall stand
disposed of in terms of this order.
6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in the terms and conditions
of the directions given by Supreme Court in the case of M. Siddaraj (supra) .
(G. S. AHLUWALIA) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
pd
