Employee retiring on 30th June entitled to 1st July notional increment for pensionary benefits after one year service.

ORDER (Oral)

Per: RANJANA SHAHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking for the following reliefs:-

“(i) By an appropriate order or direction in nature thereof, order dated 27.03.2024 May kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) By an appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed to grant one notional grade increment to the applicant, w.e.f. 1^st July 2019 for the purpose of calculating the retirement/pensionary benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment and accordingly, revised their retirement/pensionary benefits and thereafter pay him, arrears of retirement benefits and pension with interest @ rate of 9% per annum with all consequential benefits.

(iii) Any other order, direction or relief may be passed in favour of the applicant which may be deemed fit, just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2019. He had outstanding service record in his entire service career. After the sixth pay commission report, the Central Government fixed 1^st July as the date of increment for all employees by making amendment in the various Rules including Rule 10 of Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, due to which the applicant was denied the benefit of one grade increment on account of retirement on 30^th June i.e. one day before 1^st July, although he had completed a full one year in the service as on 30^th June i.e. on the date of retirement so, he is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of one grade increment admissible on 1^st July.

3. The applicant also states that the controversy involved in the present O.A. is no more res integra in as much as this Tribunal including Principal Bench, various Hon’ble High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court has finally settled the controversy holding that the employee who retires from service on 30^th June are eligible and entitled to get the benefit of one grade increment. Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Director (Admn. & HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Muundinamani & Ors. [SLP (C) No. 6185/2020), after considering and examining the divergent views of the various Hon’ble High Courts, has held that the object and purpose for grant of annual increment is required to be considered. A Government servant is granted annual increment based on his good conduct while rendering one year service. Increments are given annually with good conduct unless such increments are withheld as a measure of punishment or linked with efficiency. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of annual increment on the eventuality of having served for a specified period (one year) with good conduct. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that merely because the government servant has retired on the very next day, how can he be denied the annual increment, which he has earned and / or is entitled to for rendering the service efficiently in the preceding one year.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant also relied upon the order dated 26.03.2024 (Annexure-A/3) passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 557/2023 and OA No. 633/2023, operative part of the same is as follows:

“Accordingly, we direct the respondents in the both the OAs to grant one notional annual grade increment payable on 1^st July/1^st January to the applicants for the period from 1^st July to 30^th June/1^st January to 31^st December of the respective year of their retirement, as the case may be, and to re-fix their pension and pensionary benefits accordingly, if the applicants are found otherwise eligible for grant of such annual grade increment,