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

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1719

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Murari Lal Chandel – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Sunil Kumar Jain,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA

th

ON THE 28 OF JANUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 534 of 2026 MURARI LAL CHANDEL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sunil Kumar Jain - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Vivek Khedkar - AAG for respondents/State.

ORDER Per: Justice Anand Pathak

1. The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by inaction of the respondents for not extending the benefit of increment. The petitioner, retired on 30/06/2013, was denied increment on the pretext that he is not entitled.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whether a government employee retiring on 30th June of a year is entitled to avail the benefit of increment as fixed on 1st July is being decided by the Supreme Court recently in the case of the Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 dated 11.04.2023, wherein after considering the judgments of different High Courts including the Madhya Pradesh High Court it has been held that benefit of annual increment which is

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top