L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) A short but important question that arises for consideration in these two writ petitions is, whether an employee who retires on the date when the increment becomes due is entitled for payment of the same.

( 2 ) THE 1st respondent in W. P. Nos. 1219 and 1409 of 1998 were working as Audit officer and Supervisor respectively in the office of the 3rd petitioner. Their dates of births were 1-7-1938 and 23-6-1937 and as such they stood retired with effect from 1-7-1996 and 1-7-1995 respectively. They were denied the annual increment of the year preceding their date of retirement on the ground that they stood retired from service by the time it became due. Therefore, they filed O. A. Nos. 518/97 and 862/97 respectively before the Central administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench (for short the Tribunal ). Following its order in O. A. No. 401/92 dated 2-12-1992, the tribunal allowed the two O. As. , viz. , O. A. No. 518/97 and 862/97 through its orders dated 1-5-1997 and 16-7-1997, which are almost verbatim. The Government challenges the said orders in these two writ petitions.

( 3 ) SRI R. S. Murthy, the learned Additional central Government Standing Counsel,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document