Vinod Kumar Sahu vs M P Purva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co Ltd

Headnote:(A) Annual Increment - Entitlement of retired employees - Grant of annual increment following completion of one year of service - In cases where employees retire on 30th June or 31st December, they are entitled to the increment that falls due on the succeeding day, i.e., 1st July or 1st January respectively. (Paras 2, 3 and 6)

(B) Interest on Arrears - Clarification that interest is not to be awarded on arrears payable to the petitioners in respect of annual increments. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
Numerous petitioners, who superannuated from service on 30th June or 31st December, approached the Court seeking the benefit of the annual increment that became due on 1st July or 1st January of the succeeding year. They contended that since they completed a year of service, the increment should be added to their last drawn pay for calculating pensionary benefits. The State government had issued a circular dated 15.03.2024 directing the grant of such increments.

Findings of Court:
The court found that since the employees superannuated on 30th June or 31st December, they are entitled to receive the annual increment on the succeeding day of their retirement. The court directed the respondents to grant the annual increment with all consequential benefits, ensuring payments are made within six weeks in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines.

Issues: Whether government employees retiring on the last day of a half-year period (June 30 or December 31) are entitled to the annual increment that becomes due on the immediately following day for the purpose of pension calculations.

Ratio Decidendi: Following the Supreme Court's ruling in C.P. Mundinamani, the court held that the entitlement to an annual increment crystallises upon completion of the requisite length of service with good conduct. Retirement on the final day of a period does not preclude the payment of the increment earned by rendering service during the preceding year.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Service law — Annual increment claim by retirees on 30 June or 31 December — Entitlement under service rules. (Para 1 , 2 )

2. Petitioners claim increment due on 1 July or 1 January; State submits issue covered by circular and under implementation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )

3. Following Supreme Court, annual increment crystallises on completing one year's service and is payable from succeeding day. (Para 3 , 6 , 7 , 8 )

4. A government servant is entitled to annual increment earned on last day of service, payable from the succeeding day. (Para 3 , 4 , 6 , 8 )

5. Respondents directed to grant annual increment with consequential benefits; arrears payable per Supreme Court orders, no interest. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 )

6. When does entitlement to annual increment crystallise for a retiring government servant?

Entitlement to annual increment crystallises when the government servant completes a requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day. (Para 3 , 6 , 8 )

7. What is the limitation period for claiming arrears of annual increment for retired employees?

For petitions filed after the Supreme Court judgment, arrears are payable only from 1 May 2023; for earlier filers, from retirement date but subject to three-year limit if applicable. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 )

8. Is interest payable on arrears of annual increment granted to retired employees?

No, the Supreme Court has clarified that interest is not to be awarded on the arrears payable to retired employees for annual increment. (Para 9 , 11 )

9. Does the Supreme Court's Mundinamani judgment apply retrospectively to all retired employees?

Yes, but with limitations: enhanced pension by including one increment is payable from 1 May 2023 for third parties; for successful litigants, res judicata applies. (Para 3 , 7 , 8 , 10 )

10. What is the effect of the Supreme Court's order in M. Siddaraj on pending claims?

The court directed that cases be examined per the order dated 20 February 2025, with enhanced pension payable from 1 May 2023 for claims filed after that judgment. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 )

WRIT PETITION No. 24263 of 2024

VINOD KUMAR SAHU AND OTHERS

Versus

M P PURVA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO LTD AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Pramod Kumar Khare - Advocate for petitioners.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 27814 of 2025

SMT. SHAKUN CHOURASIYA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri D.K. Khare - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 30120 of 2025

SMT. ASHA BHONGADE

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri P.S. Tomar - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 30946 of 2025

RAMDAS VISHWAKARMA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Raj Kumar Tripathi - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 39256 of 2025

SHRI PARAMLAL KUMAR

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Paras Nath Das - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 43656 of 2025

RAMRAO GORLE

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Avesh Singh - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 44022 of 2025

SMT. SHYAMA DEVI NAGVANSHI

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Shishir Kumar Soni - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 44383 of 2025

DAYA BHARGAVA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Aviral Vinayak Jaroliya - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 45252 of 2025

DR . ASHOK TIWARI

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Ankesh Mishra - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 45591 of 2025

GOPAL PRASAD RAJAK

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Ajeet Kumar Singh - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 46434 of 2025

SUDAMA PRASAD MISHRA

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Vaibhav Kumar Pandey - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 46533 of 2025

FAKIR CHAND UIKE

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Ashish Vishwakarma - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 46669 of 2025

BAL MUKUND UPADHYAY

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Mahendra Pateriya - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 46777 of 2025

SAVITRI NAYAK

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Smt. Nirmala Nayak - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 46820 of 2025

RAGHURAJ SINGH THAKUR AND OTHERS

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Sachindra Kumar Raghuwanshi - Advocate for petitioners.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 47077 of 2025

SURESH BABU BHARGAV

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Amit Kumar Bajpai - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 47568 of 2025

KHADAK SINGH BARKADE

Versus

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Ashish Vishwakarma - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 47814 of 2025

SMT. MEERA RAWAT

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Devesh Bhojne - Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anubhav Jain - Government Advocate for respondents/State.

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 47906 of 2025

VIJAY SINGH BHAGEL

Versus

THE STATE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

A better legal experience

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1904

Government employees retiring on 30th June or 31st December are entitled to the annual increment that falls due on 1st July or 1st January, respectively, as the entitlement crystallises upon completion of one year of service preceding retirement.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

6. When does entitlement to annual increment crystallise for a retiring government servant?

7. What is the limitation period for claiming arrears of annual increment for retired employees?

8. Is interest payable on arrears of annual increment granted to retired employees?

9. Does the Supreme Court's Mundinamani judgment apply retrospectively to all retired employees?

10. What is the effect of the Supreme Court's order in M. Siddaraj on pending claims?

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1904

Government employees retiring on 30th June or 31st December are entitled to the annual increment that falls due on 1st July or 1st January, respectively, as the entitlement crystallises upon completion of one year of service preceding retirement.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

6. When does entitlement to annual increment crystallise for a retiring government servant?

7. What is the limitation period for claiming arrears of annual increment for retired employees?

8. Is interest payable on arrears of annual increment granted to retired employees?

9. Does the Supreme Court's Mundinamani judgment apply retrospectively to all retired employees?

10. What is the effect of the Supreme Court's order in M. Siddaraj on pending claims?

Login now and unlock premium legal research