Narayan Prasad Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8958 of 2019 Narayan Prasad Sahu S/o Late Shri G.P. Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Shailendra Nagar Bank Colony, Behind I.T.I. Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, General Administration Department, (Government Employee Welfare Branch) Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Finance Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, North Block Sector 19, Nirman Bhawan Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur , Chhattisgarh

5. Superintending Engineer Public Works Department (Building And Road) Durg Circle District Durg Chhattisgarh.

6. The Joint Director Treasury, Account & Pension Durg District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Vineet Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State/Respondents : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board -11-2019

1. The grievance of the petitioners 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 30.06.2018. Since the petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 30.06.2018, he would be entitled for the annual

increment that would be payable to them for the period between 1st of June, 2017 to 30th of June, 2018 as the date of annual increment payable to the petitioners is of first of July. Therefore, according to the counsel for the petitioners, while quantifying pension and other retiral dues, the annual increment which the petitioners became entitled for having worked till 30.06.2018 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 petitioners for grant of one annual increment to the last salary which the petitioners have received for the purpose of quantifying pension and other retiral dues. While deciding the claim of the petitioners, 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 R a o