Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
Mast Ram Chaudhary - Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another - Respondents
CWP No. 2234 of 2025
Decided On : 26-03-2025
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Increment and pension - Petitioner, a retired Principal, claimed an increment due on 01.01.2022 for service rendered in 2021, which was not considered by the respondents - The Supreme Court held that an employee is entitled to an annual increment earned on the last date of service. (Paras 3, 4)
(B) Interim Orders - The Supreme Court clarified that the judgment regarding increments will apply to third parties from the date of the judgment, with specific provisions for pension calculations. (Paras 4(i), 4(ii))
Facts of the case:
The petitioner retired on 31.12.2021 and sought an increment for the preceding year, which was not granted. The Supreme Court's ruling established the entitlement to increments for pension calculations.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for the notional increment and revised pension in accordance with the Supreme Court's rulings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to the increment due on retirement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the entitlement to increments based on the Supreme Court's interpretation of service rights, mandating consideration of the petitioner's claim.
Result: Writ petition disposed of, directing consideration of the increment claim.
JUDGMENT :
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
3. Petitioner, serving as Principal in the respondent-Education Department, retired on 31.12.2021 on attaining the age of superannuation. In this petition, he is claiming increment for one year of service rendered by him preceding the date of his retirement, i.e. for the period of 12 months, which was actually due to him on 01.01.2022. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner read as under:-
“(a) To issue a writ of certiorari or direction in nature thereof, quashing the impugned order dated 28.02.2024 (Annexure P-2) of the writ petition, as unconstitutional and illegal and contrary to the law;
(b) To issue a writ of mandamus, appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof, directing the respondent department to grant the annual increment due on 01.01.2022 for the service rendered in 2021 and release all consequential benefits, including arrears, with interest @ 18% for all purposes and intents.”
4. Grievance of the petitioner is that his representation dated 04.09.2023 (Annexure P-2), seeking the above reliefs, has not been considered by the respondents. The above reliefs have been prayed on the strength of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 and SLP(C) No.6185/2020, decided on 11.04.2023, wherein it was held that an employee is entitled to the annual increment, which he earned on the last date of his service for rendering services preceding one year from the date of his retirement with good behavior and efficiently.
4(i). It is not in dispute that the aforesaid order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court was clarified under an interim order passed in Union of India & Anr. vs. M. Siddaraj, Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2400/2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722/2021, order dated 06.09.2024, 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 has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment willbe payable from the month in which the application for intervention/impleadment was filed.
This interim order will continue till further orders of this Court. However, no person who has already received an enhanced pension including arrears, will be affected by the directions in (a), (c) and (d).
Re-list in the week commencing 04.11.2024.”
In the above extract
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.
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned prior to retirement, as established by the Supreme Court, affecting pension calculations.
An employee is entitled to an annual increment earned prior to retirement for pension calculations, as established by recent Supreme Court rulings.
An employee is entitled to an annual increment earned prior to retirement, 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.
Employees are entitled to annual increments earned prior to retirement for pension calculations, 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 during the last year of service, even if they retire before the increment date, as established by Supreme Court precedent.
Retired employees are entitled to increments due at retirement when calculating pension benefits.
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
