Shrishailya Kalyanrao Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 915 WRIT PETITION NO.14632 OF 2021 BALAJI MANIKRAO BIRADAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.R.P. Gaur, AGP for respondent/State.
...
AND 920 WRIT PETITION NO.5630 OF 2021 BALIRAM CHANGDEO BHOSALE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1, 2, 5 & 6. ...
AND 923 WRIT PETITION NO.9464 OF 2021 BHAGWAN KISAN SHELKE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.S.G. Sangle, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. ...
AND 924 WRIT PETITION NO.9465 OF 2021 RAJANI ANANT DEHADE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.P.S. Patil, Addl. GP for respondent nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. ...
AND 925 WRIT PETITION NO.9466 OF 2021 SHRISHAILYA KALYANRAO PATIL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.M.A. Deshpande, AGP for respondent nos.1, 2 and 4. ...
AND 926 WRIT PETITION NO.9467 OF 2021 DHONDU HACHU PAWAR AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.S.S. Tope, advocate for respondent nos.3, 4 and 5 ...
AND 927 WRIT PETITION NO.9468 OF 2021 NARAYAN KRISHNAJI DHUMAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.R. Yadav, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.U.B. Bondar, advocate for respondent nos.3 to 5. ...
AND 928 WRIT PETITION NO.9469 OF 2021 SUNANDA RAJARAM SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.R.P. Gaur, AGP for respondents.
...
AND 929 WRIT PETITION NO.9470 OF 2021 PRAMOD NARAYANRAO DASARE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.S.G. Sangle, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4. ...
AND 930 WRIT PETITION NO.9505 OF 2021 MAHADEO SAKHARAM DABHADE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.S. Patil, Addl. GP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.P.D. Suryawanshi, advocate for respondent nos.3 to 5. ...
AND 935 WRIT PETITION NO.13560 OF 2019 DIGAMBAR MUNJAJI BHASKE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.N. Janakwade, advocate for the petitioners. Mrs.R.P. Gaur, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND 1 WRIT PETITION NO.11669 OF 2019
RAJENDRA GURUPPA HULSURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.B. Rakhunde, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.S. Patil, Addl. GP for respondent no.1.
Mr.S.D. Dhongade, advocate for respondent nos.4 and 5 ...
AND 2 WRIT PETITION NO.15162 OF 2019 MANIK LINGRAM HARIDAS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.B. Rakhunde, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.R. Yadav, AGP for respondent no.1.
Mr.S.B. Patil, advocate for respondent no.5.
...
AND 3 WRIT PETITION NO.3147 OF 2021 GANESHRAO SHANKARRAO SHINDE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.S.K. Mathpati, advocate for the petitioners. Mrs.R.P. Gaur, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.V.S. Panpatte, advocate for respondent no.3. ...
AND 4 WRIT PETITION NO.7483 OF 2021 SHRIRAM DEVIDAS JOSHI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND 5 WRIT PETITION NO.7508 OF 2021 PRAKASH DHONDU WANI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs.M.A. Deshpande, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND 6 WRIT PETITION NO.7509 OF 2021 SURESH BALIRAM GOLAHIT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.P.S. Patil, Addl. GP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND 7 WRIT PETITION NO.8435 OF 2021 WITH WP/8461/2021 WITH WP/8462/2021 WITH WP/8488/2021 WITH WP/8494/2021 BABAN RAGHUNATH ADIK
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.S.R. Yadav, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. Mr.P.S. Paranjape, advocate for respondent no.4 ...
AND 8 WRIT PETITION NO.9996 OF 2021 DEEPAK DODHU NARKHEDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs.R.P. Gaur, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND 9 WRIT PETITION NO.9998 OF 2021 REJENDRA BHATU PATIL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mr.P.A. Pisal, advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs.M.A. Deshpande, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND WRIT PETITION NO.13208 OF 2019 SHIVAJI RAMRAO TIDKE DIED THROUGH L.RS.
SMT. VIJAYA SHIVAJI TIDKE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mrs.S.S. Dhongade Upadhyaya, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 11. ...
AND WRIT PETITION NO.13205 OF 2019 NARENDRA PANDHARINATH BORSE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mrs.S.S. Dhongade Upadhyaya, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ...
AND WRIT PETITION NO.11550 OF 2021 ASARAM NIVRUTTIRAO ADHAPURE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Mrs.S.S. Dhongade Upadhyaya, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.S.B. Mene, advocate for respondent nos.3 and 4. ...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & S.G.DIGE, JJ.
DATE : 04.05.2022 P.C. :
1.
Leave to add Secretary, Rural Development Department, State of Maharashtra as a respondent. Addition be carried out forthwith. Issue notice to the added respondents. The learned AGPs appearing in these matters, waive service of notice on behalf of the added respondent. 2.
In all these petitions, the issue that has been raised by the petitioners is as regards the notional addition of an annual increment, while computing their pension and pensionary benefits. Such increment became due and payable one day after their superannuation. This issue has been considered and decided by this Court [Coram : Ravindra V.Ghuge & Avinash G. Gharote, JJ.] by order
dated 24th June, 2021 in Writ Petition No.6396 of 2020 filed by Prakash Tulshiram Chaudhari Vs. State of Maharashtra and others. This order was assailed by the State of Maharashtra before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 206 of 2022. The Hon'ble Apex Court [Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishna Murari] passed an order on 12.01.2022 concluding as under:- "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Pending application also stands disposed of."
3.
This Court had based it's order dated 24th June, 2021, on the conclusions arrived at by the learned Division Bench of the Madras High Court on 15.09.2017 in Writ Petition No.15732/2017 filed by P.Ayyamperumal Vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and others. We had referred to the said judgment in our order dated 24.06.2021 and had concluded as under:-
3.
The petitioner has raised a very short issue before us. His retirement fell on 30.06.2019 and had he retired on 01.07.2019, he would have been entitled for annual increment as is provided under Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Considering this provision, the Government of Maharashtra revised the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and brought uniformity in the payment of annual increments. There is no dispute that the petitioner had worked up to 30.06.2019. He has thus, completed one year prior to his retirement. He would be entitled for an annual increment, but for the fact that the Rules prescribed that he would be entitled to such increment if he has worked on 01.07.2019, when it became payable.
4.
The issue raised in this petition has been squarely covered by the judgment delivered by the learned Division Bench of the Madras High Court on 15.09.2017 in Writ Petition No.15732/2017 filed by P. Ayyamperumal vs.
The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and others. The facts in the case before the Madras High Court were set out in paragraphs
5 and 6 and the Madras High Court drew it's conclusions in paragraph 7 and allowed the petition. Paragraphs 5 to 7 read as under :- "5.
The petitioner retired as Additional Director General, Chennai on 30.06.2013 on attaining the age of superannuation.
After the Sixth Pay Commission, the Central Government fixed 1st July as the date of increment for all employees by amending Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. In view of the said amendment, the petitioner was denied the last increment, though he completed a full one year in service, i.e. from 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013. Hence, the petitioner filed the original application in O.A.No.310/00917/2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, and the same was rejected on the ground that an incumbent is only entitled to increment on 1st July if he continued in service on that day.
6.
In the case on hand, the petitioner got retired on 30.06.2013. As per the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, the increment has to be given only on 01.07.2013, but he had been superannuated on 30.06.2013 itself.
The judgment referred to by the petitioner in State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary to Government, Finance Department and others v.
M.Balasubramaniam, reported in CDJ 2012 MHC 6525, was passed under similar circumstances on 20.09.2012,
wherein this Court confirmed the order passed in W.P.No.8440 of 2011 allowing the writ petition filed by the employee, by observing that the employee had completed one full year of service from 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2003, which entitled him to the benefit of increment which accrued to him during that period.
7.
The petitioner herein had completed one full year service as on 30.06.2013, but the increment fell due on 01.07.2013, on which date he was not in service. In view of the above judgment of this Court, naturally he has to be treated as having completed one full year of service, though the date of increment falls on the next day of his retirement.
Applying the said judgment to the present case, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the first respondent-Tribunal dated 21.03.2017 is quashed. The petitioner shall be given one notional increment for the period from 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013, as he has completed one full year of service, though his increment fell on 01.07.2013, for the purpose of pensionary benefits and not for any other purpose. No costs."
5.
The judgment of the Madras High Court in P.Ayyamperumal (supra) was carried in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.22283/2018. By order dated 23.07.2018, the Honourable Supreme Court dismissed the said Special Leave Petition.
6.
There is no dispute that Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 is identical to the amended Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 in relation to the uniformity in annual increments.
7.
Considering the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. As the petitioner is superannuated on 30.06.2019, we hold that he would be entitled to the last annual increment, which he has been deprived of and the respondents shall, accordingly, calculate the said monetary benefits expeditiously so as to be paid to the petitioner on or before 30.09.2021. So also, as the grant of this annual increment would affect his pension, gratuity, earned leave, commutation benefits, etc., the respondents would recalculate the same and make the payment of arrears on or before 30.09.2021 and shall ensure that the revised pension is also paid to the petitioner accordingly.
4.
In all these matters, all these petitioners have superannuated on the 30th day of June of the particular
years, as they were due for superannuation. For the sake of clarity, the names of the petitioners and their dates of superannuation are mentioned in a chart hereunder :- Name of the petitioners, Initial Date of Appointments, Date of Last increment & Date of superannuation of petitioners. Sr.
No Writ Petition No.
Name of Petitioners Date of Appointment Date of Last Date of Superannuation/ Retirement increment 1.
14632/2021 Balaji S/o Manikrao Biradar 15.07.1988 01.07.2020 30.06.2021 2.
5630/2021 Baliram S/o Changdeo Bhosale 23.04.1980 01.07.2011 30.06.2012 Ankush S/o Ganpatrao Ubale 13.07.1978 01.07.2014 30.06.2015 Bhaurao S/o Krushnaji Sonone 13.04.1978 01.07.2006 30.06.2007 Arjun S/o Vitthalrao Sasane 05.08.1982 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Ramrao S/o Gabaji Tathe 01.07.2009 30.06.2010 3.
9464/2021 Bhagwan S/o Kisan Shelke 17.11.1982 01.07.2019 30.06.2020 Laxman S/o Janu Tandale 26.07.1983 01.07.2012 30.06.2013 Ankush S/o Bhanudas Kakade 22.07.1983 01.07.2013 30.06.2014 4.
9465/2021 Rajani W/o Anant Dehade 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Smt. Taisin Naimvddin Mirza 01.07.2016 30.06.2017
Smt.
Leela Rohidas Suryawanshi 17.05.1983 01.07.2019 30.06.2020 Smt.
Usha Shantaram Gaikwad 20.05.1983 01.07.2019 30.06.2020 Smt. Suman Ratanrao Jadhav through its legal heir Ratanrao S/o Rangnathrao Jadhav 07.01.1986 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 5.
9466/2021 Shrishailya S/o Kalyanrao Patil 11.06.1992 01.07.2020 30.06.2021 6.
9467/2021 Dhondu S/o Hachu Pawar 14.09.1972 01.07.2006 30.06.2020 Ankush S/o Sonajirao Dabhadgaonkar 01.07.2010 30.06.2011 Bhikaji S/o Harsing Jadhav 24.07.1970 01.07.2006 30.06.2007 7.
9468/2021 Narayan S/o Krishnaji Dhumal 01.01.1989 01.07.2007 30.06.2008 8.
9469/2021 Sunanda S/o Rajaram Shinde 16.08.1984 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 9.
9470/2021 Pramod S/o Narayanrao Dasare 16.08.1976 01.07.2010 30.06.2011 Kishan S/o Marotrao Maind 06.08.1990 01.07.2011 30.06.2012 Dwarkadas S/o Nagorao Kulkarni 12.07.1989 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 10.
9505/2021 Mahadeo S/o Sakharam Dabhade 15.01.1982 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Mahadev S/o Khemaji Bhandwalkar 15.10.1982 01.07.2018 30.06.2019
Bharat S/o Murlidhar Lakhe 28.11.1983 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Dagadu S/o Bapurao Veer 01.02.1981 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 11.
3147/2021 Ganeshrao S/o Shankarrao Shinde 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 30.06.2017 Jagannath S/o Sakharam Giri 01.01.1986 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 Baburao S/o Madhavrao Shinde 29.07.1984 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Balaji S/o Vitthalrao Narwade 01.01.1986 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Rama S/o Babarao Kukade 01.01.1986 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 Pathan Jamsheedkhan Ajijkhan 18.08.1981 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 Tukaram S/o Parasram Gajabhare 31.07.1984 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 Smt.
Chandrakala Ranganath Kadtan 27.07.1984 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Vithal S/o Shamsing Pawar 17.08.1981 01.07.2013 30.06.2014 Dilip S/o Kesharchand Kanhed 02.01.1986 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Digambar S/o Kishanrao kale 18.10.1978 01.07.2014 30.06.2015 Pandurang Chimnaji Waghmare 02.09.1989 01.06.2014 30.06.2015 Sudhakarrao S/o Wamanrao Garad 10.07.1986 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 Gapal S/o 25.06.1984 01.07.2017 30.06.2018
Wamanrao Katkar 12.
13208/2019 Shivaji Ramrao Tidke 17.12.1980 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Laxman Ramchandra Yermalkar 13.07.1982 30.07.2014 30.06.2015 Arun Bhanudas Joshi 23.04.1981 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Vinayak Purushtam Kulkarni 30.08.1975 01.07.2012 30.06.2013 Govind Janaba Sherkhane 28.07.1982 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 Vishnu Raghunath Chaudhar 23.12.1982 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Gorakh Vithoba Shinde 30.04.1981 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 Hiralal Umesh Jarwal 15.10.1983 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Sheshrao Shripatrao Katkar 22.05.1981 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Syed Nizamudding Syed Imamudding 18.08.1982 01.07.2014 30.06.2015 Ram Baburao Lokhande 06.03.1984 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Madhukar Kalu Mahajan 02.08.1977 01.07.2014 30.06.2015 Vinod Pushottam Kulkarni 04.12.1976 01.07.2014 30.06.2015 13.
11550/2021 Asaram Nivruttirao Adhapure 07.07.1981 01.07.2012 30.06.2013 Sitaram Sainaji Nawle 30.09.1974 01.07.2011 30.06.2012
Dadarao Eknath Gahire 16.02.1981 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 14.
13560/2019 Digambar Munjaji Bhaske 03.01.1986 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Ankush Rambhau Fund 17.08.1981 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 Sudam Govindrao Satwadhar 20.11.1987 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 Sudam Ashroba Giram 13.08.1981 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 Shitaram Munjaji Shendre 08.07.1998 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 15.
11669/2019 Rajendra Guruppa Hulsure 08.07.1982 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 16.
15162/2019 Manik Lingram Haridas 14.08.1979 01.07.2011 30.06.2012 17.
7483/2021 Shriram Devidas Joshi 13.07.1983 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 18.
7508/2021 Prakash Dhondu Wani 02.08.1979 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 19.
7509/2021 Suresh Baliram Golahit 01.08.1985 01.07.2018 30.06.2019 20.
9996/2021 Deepak Dodhu Narkhede 20.07.1992 01.07.2020 30.06.2021 21.
9998/2021 Rajendra Bhatu Patil 01.08.1987 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 22.
8435/2021 Baban Raghunath Adik 25.08.1980 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 23.
8461/2021 Karbhari Baburao Vidhate 16.07.1977 01.07.2009 30.06.2010
24.
8462/2021 Smt.Aparna Nilkanth Chandras 01.01.1992 01.06.2018 30.06.2019 25.
8488/2021 Suresh Rajaram Varade 14.09.1997 01.07.2017 30.06.2018 26.
8494/2021 Ashok Shripat Patel 25.08.1981 01.07.2016 30.06.2017 27.
13205/2019 Narendra Pandharinath Borse 23.04.1980 01.07.2015 30.06.2016 5.
It is undisputed that the recommendations under the 6th Pay Commission altered the date on which the annual increment would have become payable, which was normally payable after putting in 12 months in continuous service preceding the date of reference and fixed the 1st day of July of each year. Prior thereto, the employees like these petitioners used to earn their annual increment by calculating 12 calendar months from the dates of their appointment for each succeeding year. As such, the reference period of 12 months for calculating the annual increment, was a period of 12 calendar months in each succeeding year from the date of appointment. For example, if person 'A' was appointed on 1st March, 2000, he would
complete 12 months in employment on 28th February 2001. He, therefore, earned his annual increment on 1st March, 2001 for the work done in 12 calendar months preceding 1st March. This was the pattern of earning annual increments after 12 months in employment in each year.
6.
By the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, uniformity was decided to be introduced and 1st of July of each year was considered to be the date on which the annual increment, for having worked for 12 calendar months preceding 1st July, would be payable. Consequentially, for the work performed in 12 calendar months till 30th June, the said employee would earn the annual increment on 1st July of the said year. It is in these peculiar circumstances that, these petitioners are before us, after having superannuated on 30th June of their respective year set out in the chart For example, if person 'A' had retired on 30th June, 2021, he would have earned the annual increment which became payable to him on 01.07.2021. As he superannuated on 30th June, 2021, he
was not granted the notional benefit of the increment which would have been payable to him on 01.07.2021 for the work performed from 01.07.2020 to 30.06.2021. 7.
It is in this circumstances, that we found that the judgment delivered by the learned Division Bench of the Madras High Court in P.Ayyamperumal (supra) was an appropriate view. We delivered an order on 24th June, 2021 in Prakash Tulshiram Chaudhari (supra). The judgment of the Madras High Court in P.Ayyamperumal (supra) was challenged by the Union of India and others in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.22283/2018. By order dated 23.07.2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court declined to interfere with the impugned judgment of the Madras High Court and dismissed the Special Leave Petition. Similarly, to the challenge to our order dated 24th June, 2021 in Prakash Tulshiram Chaudhari (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 12.01.2022. 8.
In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are allowed.
9.
Considering the dates of superannuation of these petitioners as being 30th June of the respective years, we hold that the increment payable to them on 1st July of the concerned year, after 2006, would be reckoned with for notionally calculating the pensionary benefits, which would have been payable to them from 1st July, but for their superannuation on 30th of June. This notional inclusion of the annual increment would be considered for calculating their pension, gratuity, earned leave, commutation benefits, etc.
10.
The learned Advocates for the petitioners have prayed for entire arrears from their dates of superannuation. The chart referred to below paragraph 4 indicates that some of the petitioners have superannuated in 2007. Some have superannuated in between 2008 and 2021. It is conceded that none of these petitioners have prayed for arrears of such addition of annual increments from the dates of their superannuation, in their petitions.
11.
It is quite apparent that the judgment delivered by the Madras High Court in P.Ayyamperumal (supra), became a cause for these petitioners to approach this Court. None of them had challenged the non-inclusion of the annual increment in their pensionary benefits for calculation purposes, when they superannuated on 30th June of a particular year. As the judgment delivered in P. Ayyamperumal (supra) became known to all, that these petitioners have approached this Court. Some of the petitioners have superannuated in between 2016 and 2021. 12.
Considering these aspects, we are of the view that the arrears of such benefits as granted by us in paragraph 9 hereinabove, could be restricted for a reasonable period. As such, these petitioners would be entitled for the arrears of such benefits for a period of three years preceding the dates of their superannuation or as per actuals, which ever is less. We direct the payment of such arrears accordingly and expect such payment to be made to these petitioners, on or before 30/08/2022.
(S.G.DIGE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) SGA