IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE 10 th OF JULY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 15223 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

1. RAM SHARAN KHARE S/O LATE SHRI MURARI LAL KHARE, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AVANTI WARD DHANARE COLONY NEAR NALKOOP DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. VISHAMBER SINGH JAT S/O SHRI BATTU RAGHUVEER LAL JAT, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE R/O GRAM AND POST KAPOORI DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. SURESH KUMAR GUPTA S/O SHRI SHYAM LAL GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE R/O H.NO.101 CHAWADI WARD DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. RAVI SHANKAR SHARMA S/O LATE SHRI SHREELAL SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE R/O BEHIND HOSPITAL VIJYAY COLONY BHAMA WARD GADARWARA DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. RAMNIWAS UPMANYU S/O LATE SHRI SUNDERLAL UPMANYU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE R/O NEAR RAILWAY GATE PATHAK WARD KANDELI DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SURESH KUMAR MISHRA S/O LATE SHRI HALKE BHAIYA MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE R/O 73 LOKIPAR DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONERS (BY SHRI ANSHUL TIWARI - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE M.P. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETTARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST SATPURA BHAWAN ARERA HILLS BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOREST DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SATPURA BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER NARSINGHPUR NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

7. DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER NARSINGHPUR NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ROHIT JAIN – GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

By the instant petition, the petitioners are claiming that although they stood retired on 30.06.2022, 30.6.2020, 30.6.2014, 30.6.3013, 30.6.2022 and 30.06.2022 respectively the annual increment was to be added on 1st of July of that year, but they were not granted the said benefit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled by the Supreme Court recently in Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 (The Director {Admn. and HR KPTCL} and Ors Vs. C.P. Mundinamani and Ors) wherein it has been held that benefit of annual increment which was to be added on 1st of July every year shall be paid to the employees who got retired on 30th of June of the said year, therefore the present petitioners are also entitled to get the said benefit.

3. No other argument is advanced by the counsel for the petitioners.

4. Considering the aforesaid and taking note of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in case of C.P. Mundinamani (supra), this petition is allowed

5. It is directed that the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of annual increment which was to be added with effect from 1^st of July.

6. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to recalculate the retiral dues and pension and issue fresh PPO in favour of the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of submitting copy of this order.

7. However, the petitioners no.3 and 4 had superannuated on 30.6.2014 and 30.6.2013, thus petitioner no.3 and 4 were fence sitters and they did not approach the Court and it is well established principle of law that the Court can deny relief to similarly situated person, who was not vigilant for his rights and approached the Court by waking up only after the rights of vigilant litigants were adjudicated by the court. 8. Since the petitioners No.3 and 4 were fence sitters, therefore, by extending the benefit of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of The Dir