Back
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Prahladbhai Haribhai Patel – Respondent
ORDER :
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.
1. All these Letters Patent Appeals, which are filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent by the appellants- original respondents challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned petitions, whereby, the learned Single Judge has allowed the petitions filed by the respective respondents-original petitioners.
2. As the issue involved in all these appeals is similar, learned advocates appearing for the parties jointly requested that all these appeals be heard together and the same may be decided together by this common order.
3. For the sake of convenience, the facts as stated in Special Civil Application No.11571 of 2021 are considered.
4. It is the case of the original petitioner that he had joined the service of the respondent No.2 as an Instructor (Printing) on 23.03.1981. Thereafter, the petitioner came to be promoted to the post of Rector-cum-Superintendent, (Class III). The petitioner retired from the service on 30.06.2012 on attaining the age of superannuation from the aforesaid post (Class III). It is therefore, the case of the petitioner that he had rendered service for more than 31 years with the respondent. It is further th
The entitlement to receive increment crystallizes when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day.
Government servants are entitled to increments becoming payable on 1st July even after retirement, and denying a government servant the benefit of annual increment which he has already earned while r....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entitlement to receive increment crystallizes when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct, and any....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of an employee to receive the increment on 1st July even though he had retired on 30th June, as supported by the interpretation of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a government servant to receive an increment becoming payable on 1st July even after retirement, as interpreted in various judgm....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that government servants are entitled to annual increment becoming payable on the succeeding day, even after retirement, and denying this entitleme....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of employees to the benefit of increment falling due on the 1st of July, even if they had retired on 30th June, based on the interp....
The entitlement to receive increment crystallizes when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day, and denying a governme....
Government servants are entitled to annual increments after retirement for the services rendered over a year with good behavior and efficiency, as interpreted by the Division Bench of the Court and t....
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
