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) 13835

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MR. AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J, SMT. MALLIKA ARYA, AM
Vinod Kumar Mishra, Sr Section Engineer (TRS), WC Railway, New Katni Jn., – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through General Manager, West Central Railway, Indira Market, Jabalpur – Respondent
Original Application No. 934 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Amardeep Gupta
For the Respondents:Shri S.P. Singh for respondents 1 to 8, Shri A.P. Khare for respondent no. 9

Retired employees entitled to incremental benefits for pension calculations based on service completion.

Headnote:This judgment addresses the entitlement of employees who retire on specific dates to benefit from annual increments. The applicants argue that they were denied due incremental benefits after retirement. The Court finds this denial unjust as per established principles, referencing prior Supreme Court decisions that reinforce increment entitlements post-retirement. Final directives are issued for the applicants' pensions to be re-calibrated with applicable increments, effective 01.05.2023, without retroactive enhancement beyond this date.

Table of Content
1. entitlement of retired employees to annual increments. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's rationale regarding increment entitlement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. final directives on pension recalibration. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

ORDER

By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM.-

The only question that arises for consideration is as to whether an employee, who retired on 30th June of a year or 31st December of a preceding year, is entitled to be extended the benefit of increment that falls due on 1st July or 1st January of the next year, as the case may be.

2. All the applicants, who have retired on 30th June, are aggrieved that they have not been granted the benefit of increment, which was otherwise due to them, only on the ground that by the time the increment became due, they were not in service.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Director (Admn, and HR) KPTCK and Ors. Vs C.P. Mundinamani & ors. bearing Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023, decided on 11.04.2023 [2023 SCC Online SC 401] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:-

"In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the Division Bench of the High Court has rightly directed the appellants to grant one annual increment which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of the service for rendering their services preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiently. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court. Under the circumstances, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as costs."

[Emphasis supplied]

4. From perusal of the aforesaid judgment, it is clear that appellants have been directed to grant one annual increment which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of their service for rendering their services preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behavior and efficiently. However, in the said judgment, Review Application (Dy. No.36418 of 2024) has been preferred by the Union of India before Hon’ble Supreme Court on 12.08.2024 and Their Lordship on 18.12.2024 has dismissed the said RA.

5. Even in the case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. M. Siddaraj [Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722/2021] and relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant, Misc. Application No.2400/2024 has been filed before Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking clarification regarding modalities to be adopted while implementing its order dated 06.09.2024. While observing that the issue raised in the applications requires consideration insofar as the date of applicability of judgment dated 11.04.2023 in C.A. No.2471/2023 Union of India Vs. Siddaraj (supra) to third parties is concerned. Their Lordships issued following directions, by way of an interim order dated 06.09.2024, to prevent any further litigation and confusion:-

“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 30.04.2023 (erroneously mentioned as 31.04.2023 in the Order) 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 court.

d. In case any retired employee has filed an 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 will be payable from the month in which the application for intervent

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