Back
NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Bhagwanbhai Prabhubhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas on behalf of the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Aditya Patel on behalf of the respondent – State.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent – State.
3. These Group of petitions seek similar directions from this Court and therefore, all these matters are taken up together.
4. Considering the submissions made by learned advocate for the petitioners, it would appear that all of the petitioners have retired on 30th June of various years and whereas they have been denied benefit of increment which fell due on the 1st July. It would appear that the State respondents have relied upon Rule 39 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pay) Rules, 2002 to deny the benefit of one increment and consequential benefits to the petitioners whereas, it would be a submission on behalf of the petitioners that the issue is no more res integra more particularly since various learned Coordinate Benches of this Court including Hon’ble Division Benches of this Court having taken a view in favour of the persons similarly situated to the present petitioners.
5. Learned a
The entitlement to the benefit of one increment even after retirement, based on the interpretation of Rule 39 and the purpose of granting annual increment.
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 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 ....
Government servants are entitled to receive annual increments even after retirement, based on their good conduct for a specified period, as per the provisions of F.R. CSR, Central Civil Services (Pen....
Employees entitled to notional increment earned before retirement despite accruing post-retirement, based on satisfactory prior service.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issue of payment of one increment to employees who have retired on 30th June is no longer res integra and stands decided based on various ....
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 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....
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
