Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Joginder Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
CWP No.8351 of 2024
Decided On : 09-04-2025
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus - Petitioner sought to quash a rejection order and claim an annual increment due on retirement - Court emphasized the entitlement to increments earned prior to retirement based on Supreme Court precedent. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Judicial Precedent - The court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL & Ors. v. C.P. Mundinamani, affirming that employees are entitled to increments earned during the last year of service. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a retired Circle Head Draughtsman, claimed an annual increment due on 01.05.2020, which was not paid due to his retirement before that date. He approached the court after the department failed to address his grievance.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for the increment due on 01.05.2020, referencing the Supreme Court's judgment and subsequent orders.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the rejection order and the entitlement to the annual increment upon retirement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner is entitled to the increment based on the Supreme Court's interpretation of service entitlements, emphasizing the need for timely compliance by the respondents.
Result: Petition disposed of with directions to consider the increment claim within six weeks.
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main relief:
“(i) That a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued quashing the impugned communication/rejection order dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-6)being patently illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
(ii) That the Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to grant the annual increment due to the Petitioner on 01.05.2020, and the Pension Payable to the Petitioner be ordered to be re-fixed accordingly.
(iii) The respondents may further be directed to pay to the petitioner the consequential increased amount of pension from the date of superannuation, along with the arrears plus interest thereon @9% per annum.”
2. Despite repeated opportunities, no reply has been filed on behalf of respondents. Petitioner herein retired as Circle Head Draughtsman on 30.04.2020 from the office of Engineer-in-Chief, PWD, Nirman Bhawan, Shimla. Though, annual increment of the petitioner was due on 01.05.2020, but same was not paid to him on account of fact that he stood retired prior to afore date. Precisely, the claim of the petition as put-forth in the petition is that he is entitled to one annual increment for the services rendered by him during the twelve months preceding the date of his retirement, which increment was due to him on 01.05.2020.
3. Though for redressal of his grievance, petitioner at first instance, approached respondent-department vide legal notice dated (Annexure P-5), but since same was not considered by the respondents, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for the reliefs as reproduced hereinabove.
4. Afore reliefs have been prayed by the petitioner on the basis of judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 2471 of 2023 and SLP(C) No. 6185 of 2020 titled as Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., wherein an employee has been held entitled to the annual increment, which he earned on the last date of his service for rendering services during preceding one year from the date of his retirement with good behaviour. Aforesaid order passed by Hon’ble Court was further clarified under an interim order passed in Miscellaneous application Diary No. 2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4722 of 2024 titled as Union of India & Anr. Vs. M. Siddaraj, more particularly vis-à-vis its application to third parties. The order reads as under:-
“It is stated that the Review Petition in Diary No.36418/2024 filed by the Union of India is pending.
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, and accordingly, 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 preferred, court.
(d) In case any retired employee has filed any application for intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No.3933/2023 or any other writ petition and a beneficial order ha
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned during the last year of service, even if they retire before the increment date, as established by Supreme Court precedent.
An employee is entitled to an annual increment earned prior to retirement for pension calculations, as established by recent Supreme Court rulings.
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned prior to retirement for pension calculations, as clarified by the Supreme Court.
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned prior to retirement, which must be considered for pension calculations as per Supreme Court directives.
An employee is entitled to an annual increment earned on the last date of service, impacting pension calculations.
Employees are entitled to notional increments earned prior to retirement for pension calculations, as established by the Supreme Court.
An employee is entitled to an annual increment earned prior to retirement, as clarified by the Supreme Court.
An employee is entitled to the annual increment earned on the last date of service, as established by the Supreme Court.
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned prior to retirement, as established by the Supreme Court, affecting pension calculations.
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
