Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
Vijay Singh S/o Shri Ranjeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21 of 2020
Decided on : 21-07-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 14 - Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2008 - Rule 14 - Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2017 - Rule 13 - Grant notional increment - Refix pensionary benefits - Petitions seeking direction to respondents to grant notional increment with effect from 1st July for services rendered by them and consequently refix their pensionary benefits - Held, When benefit of Annual Increment is given to employees like petitioners, then denial of such benefits to petitioners would amount to violation of their right of equality enshrined under Article 14 of Constitution of India - Hon'ble Apex Court in case of C.P. Mundinamani(supra) and All India Judges Association (supra) in favour of employees like petitioners by holding that persons would be entitled to get benefits of annual increments even on day of their retirement - Hence, under change circumstances petitioners are also entitled for same benefits - Petitioners would be entitled to get benefits of increment falling due on 1st July on account of their conduct for requisite length of time - Petitioners would be entitled to get notional payment - Petitions dispose of.
Based on the provided legal document, the key points relevant to your query are as follows:
Legal Issue: The primary question is whether retired employees, who retired just before the due date of an annual increment, are entitled to the benefit of that increment for the purpose of pension refixation and other benefits.
Legal Framework: The rules governing annual increments specify a uniform date, typically July 1st, for the grant of increments. These rules require employees to have completed a minimum period of service (usually six months) as of that date to be eligible for the increment (!) (!) .
Retirement and Increment Entitlement: The law recognizes that an employee who has completed the requisite service period with good conduct is entitled to the increment earned for that year, even if they retire immediately after or on the day before the increment date. The key principle is that the entitlement to the increment accrues on the day following its earning, which is usually the day after the employee completes the service period with good conduct (!) (!) (!) .
Finality of Supreme Court Decisions: The judgments of the highest court are binding and create a binding precedent. The finality and stability of these judgments are emphasized, and re-opening or challenging these judgments without compelling reasons is generally not permissible (!) (!) (!) .
Judicial Consensus: Multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court have consistently held that employees who have earned the increment are entitled to its benefits for pension calculation purposes, even if they retire on the last day before the increment date. The rationale is that the increment is earned based on service rendered over the year, and denying it solely because the employee was not in service on the actual increment date would be arbitrary and unreasonable (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Direction for Consideration: The courts have directed authorities to reconsider cases of retired employees in light of these principles, to grant notional increments where applicable, and to refix pensionary benefits accordingly (!) (!) .
Legal Principles: The principles of equality, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness underpin the judgments, affirming that employees who have earned the increment are entitled to its benefits, regardless of the precise date of retirement relative to the increment date.
Summary: Employees who have completed the service period necessary for earning an annual increment are entitled to that increment for pension refixation purposes, even if they retire just before the increment date. The entitlement accrues on the day after the increment is earned, and the benefit cannot be denied on the ground that the employee was not in service on the actual date of the increment. The legal rulings emphasize finality, binding precedent, and the principles of fair and reasonable treatment of retiring employees.
JUDGMENT :
1. Common question of law is involved in all these writ petitions and all these petitions are based on same facts. Therefore, with the consent of the counsel for all the parties, these matters are taken up for final disposal.
2. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India all these petitions have been submitted for seeking direction to the respondents to grant them notional increment with effect from 1st July for the services rendered by them from 1st July till 30th June and consequently refix their pensionary benefits.
3. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents have declined them the benefit of notional increment on the ground that they retired one day before the increment was due. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners worked for the entire year w.e.f. 1st July, till 30th June with good conduct and they stood retired on 30th June after attaining the age of superannuation and no departmental inquiry or judicial proceedings were pending against them, hence petitioners are entitled to get annual increment which fell due on 1st July but the benefit of the said increment has not been extended to them because they retired prior to one day i.e. on 30th June. Counsel submitted that since the petitioners completed one year prior to their retirement hence they are entitled to get benefit of notional increment which becomes due on 1st July. Counsel submitted that it would be wholly arbitrary if the increment earned by the petitioners on the basis of their good conduct for a year is denied only on the ground that they were not in employment on the succeeding day when increment became payable. Counsel submitted that the impugned action of the respondents offends the spirit of reasonableness enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. In support of their contentions they have placed reliance upon the following judgments:-
(i) All India Judges Association Vs. Union of India Writ Petition Civil No.643/2015,
(ii) The Director (Admn. And H.R.) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC online SC 401.
(iii) Gopal Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in 2020 SCC Online Delhi 2640.
(iv) P. Ayyamperumal Vs. the Registrar, Central Administration Tribunal Writ Petition No.15732/2017 decided by the Madras High Court upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court in S.L.P (C) 022008/2018 in the case of Union of India Vs. P. Ayyamperumal on 14.08.2018.
5. Counsel submitted that in view of the submissions made herein above these petitions be disposed of with directions to the respondents to grant the petitioners notional increment from 1st July till 30th June and consequently refix their pensionary benefits.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the rule making authority has specified 1st July of the year for release of annual increment for all the employees. Counsel submitted that the rule is reasonable and non-discriminatory. Counsel submitted that as the rule stands, the only interpretation possible is that a person who retires w.e.f. 30th June of a year, is not entitled to claim increment falling due on 1st July of that year. Counsel submitted that the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of P. Ayyamperumal (Supra) is per incuriam, hence the same has no binding effect. Counsel submitted that subsequently the judgment of P. Ayyamperumal (supra) was followed by various High Courts in subsequent judgments but the above judgment is not a good precedent. Counsel submitted that the similar controversy came before the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Safi Mohammad and ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Anr. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6024/2021 wherein the validity of Rule 14 of the Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2008 (for short, ‘Rule of 2008’) and Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2017 (for
Retired employees entitled to notional increment earned by completing one year service up to 30th June despite retiring next day; denial arbitrary as entitlement crystallises on service rendered with....
Employees entitled to notional increment earned before retirement despite accruing post-retirement, based on satisfactory prior service.
Retired employees completing one year service till 30th June entitled to notional increment despite retiring next day; denial arbitrary. Granted prospectively from 01.07.2023 without arrears per Supr....
Employee entitled to notional increment earned before superannuation despite retiring next day; benefit for third parties prospective from 01.05.2023 per Supreme Court clarification.
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
