IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI

th

ON THE 12 OF JANUARY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 47879 of 2025

RAJENDRA KUMAR PANDEY

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Mr. Krishna Kartikey Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sohit Mishra - GA for the State.

ORDER which was to be added on 01/07/2013. The said aspect has also been dealt with by the Full Bench of this Court also in the case of Ratanlal Rathore Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others (Writ Petition No.4118 of 2020) decided on

The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226

of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by inaction of the respondents in not extending the benefit of increment. The petitioner who retired on 30/06/2013, was

denied increment on the pretext that he is not entitled.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that whether a Government

employee retiring on 30th June/31st of December of the year, is entitled to avail the benefit of increment as fixed on 1st July/1st of January, has been decided by the Supreme Court in the case of the Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., Civil Appea