Mudit Bhaskar Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 569 of 2020 • Mudit Bhaskar Sharma S/o Shri C.L. Sharma Aged About 66 Years R/o Near Wireless Colony, Police Line , Bilaspur Police Station - Civil Line , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home / Police , Mahanadi Mantralaya Police Station And Post Rakhi , Atal Nagar Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director General Of Police (DGP) Police Head Quarter , Sector - 19, Raipur , Atal Nagar, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Superintendent Of Police (S.P.) Office Of Superintendent Of Police (S.P.) , Bilaspur , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abhishek Pandey with Ms. Deepika Sannat, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Beenu Sharma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 24/01/2020

1. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits by adding one increment which the petitioner was entitled for, on continuous working for one year before the date of retirement

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner retired on 30.06.2016 and was entitled for the benefit of one increment from 1st July. According to counsel of the petitioner, the petitioner was entitled for increment for the services rendered in the previous year and therefore has earned the said

benefit and while granting pensionary benefits, that one increment which fell due on working for one year before the retirement in the previous year, should have been added for the purpose of determining pension and pensionary benefits..

3. At this juncture, the counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of the court a recent circular of the General Administration Department of the Govt. of chhattisgarh dated 11.06.2019 whereby the State Govt., as a Policy decision, has decided to grant one increment to those employees who retire on 30th June, 2018 while fixing their pension and pensionary benefits.

4. Learned State Counsel do not dispute the fact brought to the notice of the court by the petitioner.

5. Given the aforesaid decision of the State Govt. dated 11.6.2019 the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner so far as adding one annual increment to the last wages drawn by the petitioner is concerned for the purpose of determining pension and retiral dues which the petitioner would be entitled for. The State shall be at liberty to examine the case of the petitioner individually whether the said benefit of the circular is applicable to the petitioner also. Let this exercise be completed by the respondents within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. With the above observations, this writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti