State Of Punjab And Another vs Malagar Singh
2024 Latest Caselaw 7513 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

State Of Punjab And Another vs Malagar Singh on 9 April, 2024

Author: G.S. Sandhawalia

Bench: G.S. Sandhawalia

                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB
(205)                                                       2024:PHHC: 048525-DB



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH


                                                 LPA-696-2022 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision:- 09.04.2024

           The State of Punjab and another
                                                                ...Appellant(s)

                               Versus

           Malagar Singh
                                                              ...Respondent(s)
CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
           HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI


Present:   Ms. Anu Chatrath, Additional Advocate General, Punjab,
           Mr. Saurav Khurana, Additional Advocate General, Punjab,
           for the appellants - State of Punjab in LPAs-696, 766, 809, 981,
           948, 1097, 1068, 922, 1075, 1133, 1154, 1176, 1202, 963, 956,
           958-2022, LPAs-5, 33, 88, 91, 156, 154, 167, 282, 262, 326, 333,
           372, 577, 692, 724, 883, 856, 878, 106, 111, 1155, 1341-2023 &
           LPA-154-2024.
           Mr. Tarun Kumar, Advocate,
           Mr. Swapnil Bansal, Advocate,
           for Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate,
           for the appellants in LPAs-1041 & 1034-2022.
           Mr. Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate,
           Mr. Rakesh Rai, Advocate,
           Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate,
           for the appellants (through video conferencing),
           in LPAs-1014, 1003, 1005, 1006 & 1008-2022.
           Mr. Dhruv Walia, Advocate,
           for the appellants in LPA-960-2022.
           Mr. Shreesh Kakkar, Advocate,
           for the appellants in LPA-950-2023.
           Mr. Tushaar Madaan, Advocate,
           for the appellants in LPA-1344-2023.
           Ms. Harshmir Kaur Swaitch, Advocate,
           Mr. N.S. Swaitch, Advocate,
           for the respondents in LPAs-766 & 1075-2022,
           LPAs-33, 88, 333 & 111-2023.
           Ms. Gitanjali Chhabra, Advocate,
           for the respondents in LPAs-696, 809, 1097, 1068, 1133, 1154,
           963, 958-2022, LPAs-5, 156, 692, 883 & 856-2023,
           for respondent No. 12 in LPA-922-2022,
           for respondent No. 1 in LPA-282-2023.
           Mr. N.S. Dandiwal, Advocate,
           for the respondent in LPA-1014-2022.
           Mr. Vineet Sachdeva, Advocate,
           for Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocate,
           for the respondent in LPA-1005-2022.

                              1 of 6
           ::: Downloaded on - 20-04-2024 04:21:55 :::
                                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB
LPA-696-2022 (O&M) and other connected matters            -2-             2024:PHHC: 048525-DB




         Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate,
         for respondent No. 38 in LPA-1006-2022.
         Mr. J.S. Jaidka, Advocate,
         for the respondents in LPA-1008-2022.
         Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate,
         Ms. Riti Singla, Advocate,
         Mr. Jaskirat Singh, Advocate,
         for the respondents in LPA-948-2022.
         Mr. Subhash Kumar, Advocate,
         for the respondents in LPA-1034-2022.
         Mr. Lakshay Goel, Advocate,
         Mr. Mohit Singh, Advocate,
         for Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate,
         for respondents No. 1 to 4, 8, 9, 16, 17, 21, 22 & 25 to 27
         in LPA-922-2022.
         Ms. Rythem Bajaj, Advocate,
         for respondents No. 10 & 14 in LPA-922-2022.
         Mr. Arun Kumar Vasudeva, Advocate,
         for Mr. Amrik Singh, Advocate,
         for the respondents in LPA-1176-2022 & LPA-91-2023.
         Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate,
         for the respondent in LPA-1202-2022.
         Mr. Y.P. Singla, Advocate,
         for the respondent in LPA-167-2023.
         Mr. Nitesh Singla, Advocate,
         for respondents No. 1, 4, 6, 8 & 9 in LPA-326-2023.
         Mr. Abhishek Khullar, Advocate,
         for the respondent in LPA-372-2023.
         Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate,
         for the respondent in LPA-577-2023.
         Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate,
         Mr. Satvir Singh, Advocate,
         for the respondents in LPAs-950 & 1344-2023.
                                 ****
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, A.C.J. (ORAL)

1. The present set of appeals (details whereof have been given at the

foot of judgement) are directed against the order dated 16.03.2022 passed by

the learned Single Judge, whereby 23 writ petitions were allowed.

2. Resultantly, the relief claimed as such for grant of one notional

increment which had not been extended to the respondents-writ petitioners as

they had retired from service a day earlier was granted to them while keeping

in mind the provisions of Rule 4.7 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules,

Volume 1 Part 1. The reliance upon Rule 4.9-A of the Rules ibid by the State

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB LPA-696-2022 (O&M) and other connected matters -3- 2024:PHHC: 048525-DB

was as such distinguished and the benefit as such was granted with a direction

that the last drawn pay at the time of retirement and pensionary benefits be

re-calculated. The respondents-writ petitioners were not held entitled for any

arrears prior to the date of filing of the writ petitions as agreed by them on the

basis of consent and re-fixation was to be done within a period of two months

from the receipt of copy of the order with the release of actual arrears within a

period of one month.

3. The present appeals are also barred by around 43 to 621 days'

delay in filing and 04 to 71 days' delay in re-filing. It has been brought to our

notice that while dealing with the said bunch, CWP-22679-2020 titled Hari

Sharma and others Vs Principal Secretary and others was also decided.

LPA-139-2024 filed by the State already stands dismissed by another

Coordinate Bench on 16.01.2024 while placing reliance upon the judgement of

the Apex Court in The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & others Vs C.P.

Mundinamani and others, 2023 AIR (SC) 1956. The relevant portion reads as

under:-

"(3) The afore issue stands settled in the employees' favour by the Supreme Court in its recent decision dated 11.04.2023 passed in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 (SLP (C) No.6185 of 2020) - The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & others vs. C.P. Mundinamani and others. The relevant portions of the said judgment are reproduced below for reference : -

"6.5 Now, so far as the submission on behalf of the appellants that as the increment has accrued on the next day on which it is earned and therefore, even in a case where an employee has earned the increment one day prior to his retirement but he is not in service the day on which the increment is accrued is concerned, while considering the aforesaid issue, the object and purpose of grant of annual increment is required to be considered. A government servant is granted the annual increment on the basis of his good conduct while rendering one year service. Increments are given annually to officers with good conduct unless such increments are withheld as a measure of punishment or linked with efficiency.

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB LPA-696-2022 (O&M) and other connected matters -4- 2024:PHHC: 048525-DB

Therefore, the increment is earned for rendering service with good conduct in a year/specified period. Therefore, the moment a government servant has rendered service for a specified period with good conduct, in a time scale, he is entitled to the annual increment and it can be said that he has earned the annual increment for rendering the specified period of service with good conduct. Therefore, as such, he is entitled to the benefit of the annual increment on the eventuality of having served for a specified period (one year) with good conduct efficiently. Merely because, the government servant has retired on the very next day, how can he be denied the annual increment which he has earned and/or is entitled to for rendering the service with good conduct and efficiently in the preceding one year.

xxxx xxxx xxxx

7. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the Division Bench of the High Court has rightly directed the appellants to grant one annual increment which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of their service for rendering their services preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiently. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court. Under the circumstances, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs."

(4) Thus, the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani's case (supra) has decided in no uncertain terms that an employee who has earned his annual increment is entitled to the same despite the fact that he has retired a day prior to its accrual.

(5) In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani's case (supra), we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in fact or in law to allow the respondents' petition.

(6) In the light of the above, the appeal is dismissed both on the ground of delay as also on merits.

(7) No costs."

4. Learned State counsel as such could not dispute the factual aspect

that one of the appeals out of the same judgement stands dismissed.

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB LPA-696-2022 (O&M) and other connected matters -5- 2024:PHHC: 048525-DB

Resultantly, keeping in view the above, we do not find any plausible reason to

take a different view.

5. Resultantly, the applications for condonation of 43 to 621 days'

delay in filing and 04 to 71 days' delay in re-filing are allowed and the appeals

are dismissed.

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 09.04.2024 Amodh Sharma

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

Sr. No. Case No. Parties Details

1. LPA-766-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Raj Kumar Arora

2. LPA-809-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Harminder Singh and another

3. LPA-1041-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Ramesh Kumar Sharma

4. LPA-1014-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Jaswant Singh

5. LPA-981-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Dasrath Singh

6. LPA-1003-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Mulkh Raj (since deceased) through his LR Bharat Bhushan and others

7. LPA-1005-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Ramesh Kumar

8. LPA-1006-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Paramjit Singh and others

9. LPA-1008-2022 The Punjab State Power Corporation Limited Vs Raj Kumar Chauhan and others

10. LPA-948-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Karan Vir Singh and others

11. LPA-1034-2022 The Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Balwinder Singh and others

12. LPA-1097-2022 State of Punjab and another Vs Alvin Masih

13. LPA-1068-2022 The State of Punjab and another Vs Naresh Kumar Dhir and others

14. LPA-922-2022 The State of Punjab and another Vs Harmit Singh and others

15. LPA-1075-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Surinder Kaur Jawanda

16. LPA-1133-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Darshan Singh

17. LPA-1154-2022 State of Punjab and another Vs Surinder Singh Virk

18. LPA-1176-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Parminder Singh Mangat

19. LPA-1202-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Harjinder Singh

20. LPA-5-2023 The State of Punjab and another Vs Harmesh Kumar

21. LPA-33-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Major Singh

22. LPA-88-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Inderjit Singh

23. LPA-91-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Parvesh Kumar

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048525-DB LPA-696-2022 (O&M) and other connected matters -6- 2024:PHHC: 048525-DB

24. LPA-156-2023 The State of Punjab and others Vs Satpal Kalsi

25. LPA-154-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Jaspinder Pal Singh Sandhu

26. LPA-963-2022 The State of Punjab and others Vs Baljeet Singh and others

27. LPA-167-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Madan Lal Singla

28. LPA-960-2022 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Gurtej Singh Sandhu

29. LPA-282-2023 The State of Punjab and another Vs Balwant Rai and another

30. LPA-262-2023 State of Punjab and another Vs Davinder Singh and others

31. LPA-326-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Vaishno Dass and others

32. LPA-333-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Ashok Kumar Handa and others

33. LPA-372-2023 The State of Punjab and others Vs Manohar Lal

34. LPA-577-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Gurmeet Singh

35. LPA-692-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Ramesh Kumar Goyal

36. LPA-724-2023 The State of Punjab and others Vs Kumar Singh Rana and others

37. LPA-883-2023 The State of Punjab and another Vs Prem Savrup Chhabra

38. LPA-856-2023 The State of Punjab and another Vs Harpal Singh Walia

39. LPA-878-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Gurdev Singh and others

40. LPA-950-2023 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others Vs Pritpal Singh

41. LPA-106-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Baljinder Kumar Mantro

42. LPA-111-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Prem Sagar Bali

43. LPA-1155-2023 State of Punjab and others Vs Navroop Singh and others

44. LPA-956-2022 State of Punjab and others Vs Dharm Paul Sharma

45. LPA-958-2022 State of Punjab and another Vs Varinder Kumar Sharma and others

46. LPA-1341-2023 The State of Punjab and others Vs Sukhwinder Singh

47. LPA-1344-2023 Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and another Vs Naseeb Chand

48. LPA-154-2024 The State of Punjab and another Vs Shashi Kant Sodhi and another

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 09.04.2024 Amodh Sharma

6 of 6