Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing annual increments to the petitioner for the suspension period from 12.06.2019 to 21.07.2021 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Fundamental Rule 24, and consequently direct the respondents to release the said increments with all consequential benefits, by extending the benefit of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.29457 of 2024, dated 04.02.2026 ,and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the annual increments to the petitioner for the suspension period from 12.06.2019 to 21.07.2021 and pass

The Court made the following ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not releasing annual increments to the petitioner for the suspension period from 12.06.2019 to 21.07.2021 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Fundamental Rule 24.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that the Petitioner was not paid annual grade increments during the period of suspension i.e., from 12.06.2019 to 21.07.2021, even though representations were given to that effect to the Respondent-Authorities.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner relied upon a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 6617 of 2004 and similar judgments passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.9228 of 2021, 4553 of 2021, and 18004 of 2022. This Court in similar circumstances had directed the Respondent Authorities to sanction the annual grade increments after referring to the provisions of F.R.24.

5. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the representations of the petitioner for the purpose as sought would be considered by the Respondent-Authorities and an appropriate decision would be taken.

6. The Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 6617 of 2004, dated 04.11.2004, was considering the case of an individual seeking subsistence allowance after factoring in the annual grade increments. The Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal had directed that the subsisting allowance be paid after taking into account the annual increments. In the Writ Petition filed by the State, the Division Bench of this Court, after referring to the provisions of FR 24, held that unless an order of withholding increments is passed, the same cannot be withheld. The paragraphs Nos. 5, 6, and 7 thereof are extracted below:

“It is contended by the Petitioners that in view of the provisions of F.R.24, as the Respondent has not been in active service, there is no method by which his conduct in service be judged. Therefore, he is not entitled to any incremental benefits. In view of the provisions of F.R.24:

“F.R.24. An increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld. An increment may be withheld from a Government Servant by (the State Government), or by any authority to whom the State Government may delegate this power if his conduct has not been good or his work has not been satisfactory. In ordering the withholding of an increment the withholding of an increment the withholding authority shall state the period of which it is withheld, and whether the postponement shall have the effect of postponing future increments”.

It is apparent from the rule that an increment shall be drawable by an employee as a matter of course unless it is withheld. An increment may however be withheld on proof of a Government Servant’s unsatisfactory or bad con