An individual retiring on the last day of the month is not entitled to any increments or benefits due the following month, as they are no longer in service.

JUDGMENT

T.R Ramachandran Nair, J.

The challenge by the petitioners is against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.1039/2003. The Original Application was filed by the first respondent seeking for a direction to release the annual increment that fell due on 1.1.1996 with consequential benefits. He had retired from service on attaining the age of 58 years with effect from 31.12.1995. The Tribunal has taken the view that the applicant is entitled to be paid the increment which fell due on 1.1.1996 and granted consequential benefits.

2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the first respondent/applicant. Relying upon Ext.P8 judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, Shri T.P.M. Ibrahim Khan, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners contended that once a person has retired from service on attaining superannuation, there is no question of granting increments which fell due on the next day, as he was not in service on that day. Reliance is also placed on FR 17(1), FR 56(a), FR 24 and FR WPC 26613/2005 -2-

26 mainly to contend that once the officer ceases to discharge the duties attached to a post, the question of drawing an increment does not arise. Reliance is also placed on the recent decision of the Apex Court in Achhaibar Maurya v. State of U.P. And others {(2008) 2 SCC 639}.

3. The relevant facts show the following: The respondent retired from service on 31.12.1995 on attaining the age of 58. The claim is for the next annual increment which fell due on 1.1.1996. The Tribunal allowed the O.A. on the ground that the right to gain the increment arose after completion of one year service and what remains thereafter is only enforcement in the form of payment. Therefore, a benefit of the year long service cannot be denied on the plea that the employee ceased to be in service on the day on which he was to have been paid the increment. Reliance was also placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this court in Union of India v. George (2003 (3) KLT 387) and that of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in O.A.No.797/92 and also the judgment of the Tribunal in O.A.No.36/2004.

4. In fact, the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal has been overruled by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Ext.P8 judgment. 5. A reference to the relevant rules will be of advantage here. Going by FR 17(1), subject to any exceptions specifically made in these rules and to the provisions of sub-rule (2), an officer shall begin to draw pay and WPC 26613/2005 -3-

allowances attached to his tenure of a post with effect from the date when he assumes the duties of that post, and shall cease to draw them as soon as he ceases to discharge those duties. Under FR 56(a), except as otherwise provided in this rule, every Government servant shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of 58 years. It is clear from the relevant rules FR 24 and FR 26 that an increment can be drawn by a Government servant who is on duty. It is also clear that he should continue to draw pay and allowances attached to that post. Judged in the light of the above provisions, once the person has attained superannuation and has retired from service, it cannot be said that he will be entitled to draw the increment which fell due on the next day. For enabling him to draw the increment, he should be a person who is in service and who is entitled to draw pay and allowances. Herein, as on 1.1.1996, the applicant will be entitled to draw pension only and not any pay and allowances. He can be treated only as a retired Government servant and not a Government servant on duty. For these reasons, according to us, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be accepted.

6. Very same issue was considered by a Full Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Ext.P8 judgment. After elaborately considering the matter, it was held by the Full Bench that a person retiring on the last day of the prece