Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Aniruddha P. Mayee, J.
Khemchandbhai Govindbhai Parmar – Petitioner
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 19806 of 2023
Decided On : 22-01-2024
Increment - Retirement Benefits - State of Gujarat v. Takhatsinh Udesinh Songara and Anr., Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Ors. v. C. P. Mundinamani and Ors., State of Gujarat v. Prahladbhai Haribhai Patel and Ors. - [Increment, Retirement Benefits] - [State of Gujarat v. Takhatsinh Udesinh Songara and Anr., Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Ors. v. C. P. Mundinamani and Ors., State of Gujarat v. Prahladbhai Haribhai Patel and Ors.] - The court discussed the entitlement of government servants to annual increment after retirement, emphasizing that denying a government servant the benefit of annual increment which he has already earned while rendering specified period of service with good conduct and efficiently would be arbitrary and unreasonable. The court referred to various judgments and held that 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. The court also highlighted that any interpretation leading to arbitrariness and unreasonableness should be avoided.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners retired from service on 30.06.2015, 30.06.2017, 30.06.2008, 30.06.2018, 30.06.2019, 30.06.2009, 30.06.2019 respectively, on attaining the age of superannuation. They claimed entitlement to annual increment for the period preceding their retirement, which was denied by the respondent authorities. The petitioners filed a Special Civil Application seeking relief.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the government servants were entitled to annual increment after retirement, as denying them the benefit of annual increment which they had already earned while rendering specified period of service with good conduct and efficiently would be arbitrary and unreasonable. The court referred to various judgments, including State of Gujarat v. Takhatsinh Udesinh Songara and Anr., Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Ors. v. C. P. Mundinamani and Ors., and State of Gujarat v. Prahladbhai Haribhai Patel and Ors., to support its finding.
Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of government servants to annual increment after retirement and whether denying them the benefit of annual increment for the period preceding their retirement was arbitrary and unreasonable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that 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. It emphasized that any interpretation leading to arbitrariness and unreasonableness should be avoided.
Final Decision: The Special Civil Application was allowed, and the respondent authorities were directed to revise the pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioners accordingly. The revised pension, arrears, and the retirement benefits were to be paid to the petitioners within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the order, failing which, the said amount would carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum till the same is paid.
ORDER :
1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for the following reliefs:-
B. YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction and quash and set aside the action of the respondent authorities of not releasing the periodical/ yearly increment preceding for discharge of duties by the petitioners for a period preceding the one year preceding the 1st week of July of respective calendar year in which the petitioners attended the age of superannuation and therefore the said action of the respondent authorities for not releasing the last yearly/periodical increment to the petitioners though the petitioners have attended the age of superannuation on 30th June of the respective calendar year and became eligible and entitle to get yearly increment. the aforesaid action for not releasing the yearly increment is arbitrary and illegal;
C. Be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pass appropriate order for making payment/for releasing the periodical yearly increment/increments which has become due and payable to the petitioners as the basis of discharge of duties from the 1st week July of respective calendar year in which the petitioners attended the age of superannuation and the Hon'ble Court may issue further direction to the respondent authorities or may kindly be directed to recalculate "Last Pay" drawn by the petitioners after addition of yearly/periodical increment in the "Salary & Wages" of the petitioners and the Hon'ble Court May kindly direct the respondent authorities to recalculate/revise the pension/gratuity/leave encashment and other consequential benefits after addition of the aforesaid increment in the "Last pay drawn" by the petitioners and the difference of salary may kindly be ordered to be paid with 12% interest from the respective date of superannuation of the petitioners;
D. YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction and quash and set aside the action of the respondent authorities of not releasing the periodical/ yearly increment preceding for discharge of duties by the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B) for a period preceding the one year preceding the 1st week of July of respective calendar year in which the employees (As mentioned in Annexure-B) attended the age of superannuation and therefore the said action of the respondent authorities for not releasing the last yearly/periodical increment to the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B) though these employees have attended the age of superannuation on 30th June of the respective calendar year and became eligible and entitle to get yearly increment. the aforesaid action for not releasing the yearly increment is arbitrary and illegal;
E. Be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pass appropriate order for treating and considering the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B)similar to the present petitioners as per GR dated 31/08/1988 (Annex. J) and 22/08/2014 the (Annex. I) and be pleased to issue appropriate directions upon the respondent authorities to make payment/ release the periodical yearly increment/increments which has become due and payable to the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B) on the basis of discharge of duties from the 1st week July of respective calendar year in which the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B) have attended the age of superannuation and the Hon'ble Court may issue further direction to the respondent authorities or may kindly be directed to recalculate "Last Pay" drawn by the employees (whose names have been mentioned in Tabular Form Statement Annexed at Annexure-B) after addition of yearly/periodical increment in the "Sala
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 beco....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that government servants are entitled to annual increment after retirement, as the increment becomes payable on the succeeding day and denying it w....
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 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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a government servant to annual increment after retirement, emphasizing that denying the benefit earned through good conduct and ....
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 a government servant to receive an increment becoming payable on 1st July even after retirement, as interpreted in various judgm....
Employees entitled to notional increment earned before retirement despite accruing post-retirement, based on satisfactory prior service.
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
