Prahlad Prasad Miri v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1600 of 2020 • Prahlad Prasad Miri S/o Shri Rujhu Ram Aged About 66 Years Retired Pradhan Pathak Shash. Purv Madhyamik Shala Navgawa District Janjgir Champa R/o Devkoni Thana And Tahsil Baloda District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Samanya Prashashan Vibhag, Shash. Karmchari Kalyan Shakha Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Secretary, School Shiksha Vibhag, Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. District Education Officer, Janjgir Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

4. Block Education Officer, Baloda Vikashkhand Baloda District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

5. Sambhagiya Sanyukt Sanchalak, Kosh Lekha Avm Pension Bilaspur Sambhag District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Ravish Verma, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 09/03/2020

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. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

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