A. S. Faruqui v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP(S) No.1525 of 2020 • A. S. Faruqui S/o Late Shri Abdul Rahim Aged About 69 Years Sevanivritta Sahayak Abhiyanta Lok Swasthya Yantriki Upkhand, Baikunthpur, NivasiHanuman Nagar Kalibadi, Thana City Kotwali, Raipur, Jila Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Sachiv, Samanya Prashasan Vibhag, Saskiya Karmachari Kalyan Shakha, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Secretary Lok Swasthya Yantriki Vibhag Chhattisgarh Shasan Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Pramukh Abhiyanta Lok Swasthya Yantriki Vibhag Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Jila Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Pramukh Sachiv Vitta Vibhag Chhattisgarh Shasan Raipur, Jila Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. Sambhagiy Sanyukt Sanchalak Kosh Lekha Evam Penshan Raipur, Sambhag, Jila Raipur, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For State :

Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 05.03.2020 1.

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

2.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner retired from service on 30th June,2013. Since the petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 30.06.2013, he would be entitled for the annual increment that would

be payable to him for the period between 1st of June, 2012 to 30th of June, 2013 as the date of annual increment payable to the petitioner is 1 st 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, 2013 has to be added to the last pay and other allowances also. 3.

Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, let the concerned respondents 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 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 Yasmin/Jyoti