Back
ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
Fanendra Kumar Bisen, S/o Late Soman Lal Bisen – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Law And Legislative Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Arvind Kumar Verma, J.)
1. The challenge in the instant petition is to order dated 30/01/2019, whereby the claim of the petitioner for continuance of two advance increments has been closed.
2. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the order dated 30/01/2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 3 and the order dated 28/12/2018 (Annexure P/2) passed by respondent No.1.
10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to respondent authorities to refixed the pay scale of the petitioner after adding two advance increments in the newly fixed pay scale of the petitioner and the petitioner may kindly be paid his salary accordingly from 19/01/2005 onward and further the benefit of two advance increments should be given to the petitioner on the revision of his future pay scale.
10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.
3. Facts of the case in the nutshell are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Grade-III vide order dated 24.01.1992. The wife of the petitioner had undergone family planning ope
An employee cannot claim further advance increments after promotion, as these increments are included in the basic pay upon promotion.
Advance increments to stenographers for shorthand speed are 'pay for all purposes', including annual increments, till promotion/ACP/MACP; department's exclusion for increment calculation unjustified ....
An employee is entitled to an increment if their juniors receive a lower pay, provided no undue advantage in promotion or pay scale is claimed.
An employee need not wait for twelve months from the fixation of his/her pay in the new scale for earning in the revised scale.
The denial of increment to retired employees based on Rule 39 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pay) Rules, 2002 was found to be arbitrary and unreasonable, and the court emphasized the entitlement of e....
the relief claimed in the petition, even based on the judgment in the case of Dr B.M. Gupta, is not tenable in law as there is gross delay in approaching the Court even if presuming it to be similar ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
