SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6343

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Jagjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Police – Respondent
O.A./1858/2025



Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A. No.1858/2025 This the 19th day of May, 2025 Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

Jagjit Singh Retd. Delhi Police from MT Traffic as Sub Inspector Driver Age About 65 years, S/o Sh.Niranjan Singh H.No/A-6 first Floor Kewal Park Extension Azadpur, West Delhi-110033.

...Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Pramod Kr. Tiwari, Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma)

Versus

1. The commissioner of police, Delhi Police Headquarters, Jai Singh Road New Delhi

110001.

2. THE DCP Head Quarter Traffic Police Toda Pur NewDelhi 110012.

...Respondent (By Advocate: Ms. Kiran Ahlawat)

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following relief(s):

“(a) Direct the Respondents to extend the benefit of W.P. (C) 1731/2020 and other similar decisions to the applicant of this OA also and to grant one notional increment for the period from 01st July 2013 to 30th June 2014 for purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and accordingly re- fix the pension and pensionary benefits and pay the arrears along with admissible interest by extending the benefit of OA 1811/2024, Ambrish Kumar & Ors. V/s UOI.

(b) Award the costs of the original application in favour of the Applicants;

and (c) pass such other/further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant superannuated on 30.06.2014. He is seeking the benefit of one notional increment due to him on 01.07.2014. The applicant represented before the respondents, but no relief has been provided till date. Being aggrieved, the applicant approached this Tribunal and prayed for the aforesaid relief(s).

3. The applicant is seeking payment of notional increment based on the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court on 11.04.2023 in Civil Apopeal No.2471/2023 (SLP No.618507/2020) titled as The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., reported in (2023) SSC Online SC 401, wherein benefit of notional increment was granted to the employees retiring on 30th June/31st December and their increment is due on 1st July/1st January for pensionary benefits.

4. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of grant of notional increment to such government employees, who are superannuated on a day prior to the date on which the increment was due, the only matter to be considered was the date of implementation of the said order. The judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court was reviewed once again on account of a petition filed by the respondents in Union of India & Anr. vs. M. Siddaraj, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court passed the following order on 06.09.2024:-

“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 c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top