Employees entitled to notional increment earned before retirement despite accruing post-retirement, based on satisfactory prior service.

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in not granting increment due to them on completion of one year of service since their last annual increment, the present application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 are praying for the following reliefs :

“8(a). This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the Respondents and after examining the same, direct the Respondents to grant one increment to the Applicants on 1^st of July of their respective years of retirement with all consequential benefits.

8(b). This Hon’ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the Respondents to re-fix the pension and pensionary benefits of the Applicants on account of grant of one increment and to pay them difference of pension and pensionary benefits along with interest @12% per annum.

8(c). Costs of the application be provided for.

8(d). Any other and further order as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case be passed.”

3. MA No.637/2024 (Joint Petition) –

This application has been filed by the applicants seeking permission to file the present Original Application jointly as common relief as the applicants are similarly situated and have a common cause of action. Considering the reasons assigned by the applicants, the same is allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant, at the outset, submitted that the issue involved in the present Original Application is no more res-integra and is covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Others Vs. C.P.Mundinamani & Others in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 decided on 11.04.2023. It is submitted that averments made in the paragraph No.4.1 of the application that all the applicants have retired with effect from the date mentioned in the said paragraph. After their retirement, some of them have submitted representation to the Competent Authority for grant of annual increment. It is stated that similar issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of C.P.Mundinamani (supra).

4(a). Following the aforesaid judgment, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in OA No.1153/2023 in the case of Manoharlal Gupta & Others Vs. Union of India & Anr decided on 18.12.2023 directed the official respondents to grant annual increment to the applicants from the date next to the date of their retirement. Therefore, in the present application, the applicants have prayed for the similar benefits.

5. After considering the submissions as advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, it is clear that this Tribunal in the aforesaid OA No.1153/2023 passed the following order :

“The applicants in this OA is claiming notional increment. The applicants retired between 30^th June, 2017 and 30^th June, 2021. They are claiming notional increment in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 11^th April, 2023 in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023, titled as The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Others Vs. C.P.Mundinamani & Others, the Apex Court held thus :

“6. The short question which is posed for the consideration of this Court is whether an employee who has earned the annual increment is entitled to the same despite the fact that he has retired on the very next day of earning the increment?

6.1. In the present case, the relevant provision is Regulation 40(1) of the Regulations which reads as under: -

“Drawals and postponements of increments

40(1). An increment accrues from the day following that on which it is earned. An increment that has accrued shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless