High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/467/2020disposed off

Ramesh Kumar Sao v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 467 of 2020 • Ramesh Kumar Sao S/o Late Shri Teejram Sao, Aged About 66 Years R/o. Bangali Para, Sarkanda Gali No. 3, Pathak Gali, Bilaspur, Tahsil Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, State Government Of Chhattisgarh Panchayat And Gramin Vikas Vibhag Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh Gramin Sadak Vikas, Abhikaran Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Superintending Engineer, Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna Mandal Office, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Joint Director, Treasury And Account Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Ravish Verma, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 21/01/2020

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for grant of the benefit of one annual increment while fixing pension and other retiral dues payable to the petitioner.

2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has retired from service on 30th of June, 2016. Since he has retired from service w.e.f. 30.06.2016, he would be entitled for the annual increment that would be payable to him for the period between 1st of June, 2015 to 30th of June, 2016 as the date of annual

increment payable to the petitioner is 1st of July. Therefore, according to the counsel for the petitioner, while quantifying pension and other retiral dues, the annual increment which the petitioner became entitled for having worked till 30th June, 2016 has to be added to the last pay and other allowances also.

3. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, let the respondents 1 to 3 consider the case of the petitioner for grant of one annual increment to the last salary which the petitioner has received for the purpose of quantifying pension and other retiral dues. While deciding the claim of the petitioner, the respondents shall take into consideration the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in the case of P. Ayyamperumal vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and others decided on 15.09.2017 in W. P. No. 15732 of 2017.

4. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti