The Supreme Court's order on increment benefits binds lower courts, and refusal of special leave does not imply merger of orders.

ORDER :

A.S. Supehia, J.

At the outset, learned AGP has submitted that the applicants have already been paid as per the order of the Apex Court dated 06.09.2024 passed in Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722 of 2021.

1. At the outset, we may mention that the issue pertains to the grant of one increment to the employees of the State and also who are serving under District Panchayats and other bodies, which are more than 15,000 in number, and numerous writ petitions filed by them.

2. The present application is filed seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents. By the order dated 26.09.2023, the learned Single Judge while following the directions issued by the Apex Court vide judgment dated 11.04.2023 in case of Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL and Ors. v. C.P. Mundinamani And Ors. , (being Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023 ), has allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to confer the benefit of one increment.

3. The said judgment and order was carried further by the State by filing Letters Patent Appeals however, the same were disposed of. It is not in dispute that similar orders passed by this Court of the Division Benches were assailed before the Apex Court and the SLP were dismissed summarily.

4. As noticed by us, numerous matters were filed after the judgment was rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.10308 of 2021 dated 11.08.2021. It is also not in dispute that in various High Courts of the country, such issue about grant of one increment accruing on 1st July to its employees and who had retired on 30th June, was raised and examined by different High Courts. Ultimately, the Apex Court in the judgment in the case of C.P. Mundinamani And Ors. (supra), dated 11.04.2023, disposed of the Special Leave Petition on identical issue.

5. Thereafter, the State Government had promulgated a policy for conferring the benefits of one increment to the thousands of employees working across various local bodies and various departments of State of Gujarat. The said policy was thereafter, withdrawn in view of the order passed by the Apex Court dated 06.09.2024 passed in Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722 of 2021. The Apex Court vide order dated 06.09.2024 had issued clarificatory directions, clarifying the manner and method in which the aforesaid benefit of one increment is required to be extended. Such clarificatory directions are issued in case of C.P. Mundinamani And Ors. (supra). Such directions are as under:

“The issue raised in the present applications requires consideration, insofar as the date of applicability of the judgment dated 11.04.2023 in Civil Appeal No. 2471/2023, titled “Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and Others v. C.P. Mundinamani and Others”, to third parties is concerned.

We are informed that a large number of fresh writ petitions have been filed.

To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an interim order we direct that:

(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment, that is, the pension by taking into account one increment will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be paid.

(b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, andaccordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment would have to be paid.

(c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court.

(d) In case any retired employee has filed any application for intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/202