Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:15570
Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1517 of 2022
Petitioner :- Chandrika Prasad
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 11.02.2022 whereby the annual increment on notional basis with effect from 01.07.2020 with all consequential benefits alongwith arrears of difference of pension has been rejected.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has retired on 30.06.2020 from the post of Joint Director Consolidation but the annual increment was not given to him.
3. It is further submitted that the case of the petitioner is covered by the judgment and order of this Court dated 12.12.2022 passed in Writ-A No.5311 of 2021, 'Deputy Superintendent of Police Chandra Pal Singh & 5 Others Vs. State of U.P. & 2 Others', which is quoted here-in-below:-
"Instructions submitted by the Standing Counsel are taken on record. Both the writ petitions raised a common issue, as such the same are being decided by means of a common judgment.
For the sake of brevity, facts of writ petition no. 5311 of 2021 are being referred.
The claim of the petitioners in the present case is that they are entitled to the benefit of notional increment for the year 2017, despite the petitioners have been retired on 30th June of the calendar year, however they have been denied the benefit of notional increment as the same is payable only with effect from 1st July of the calendar year.
1
The Standing Counsel has produced instructions to the same effect that the Government Order issued by the State also does not entitle the petitioners for the benefit of the notional increment. The said issue has already been decided by this Court in Writ A No. 13299 of 2020 (Nand Vijay Singh Vs. Union of India) decided on 29.06.2021. In view of the said judgment, the stand taken by the State Government can not be sustained.
Accordingly, both writ petitions are allowed.
The impugned orders of both the above writ petitions are set aside with directions to take rest increment to the petitioner despite the petitioners have been retired on 30th June of the calendar year 2017, in the light of judgment in the case of Nand Kishor (Supra) and the benefits as directed above shall be granted to the petitioners within a period of three months from today. "
4. It is further submitted that the aforesaid judgment has been affirmed by the judgment and order dated 19.07.2023 passed in Special Appeal Defective No.489 of 2023 hence the petitioner is entitled for the parity of the above mentioned judgment.
5. Learned counsel for the State has clearly submitted that the case of the petitioner is covered by the judgment in the case of
Deputy Superintendent of Police Chandra Pal Singh & 5 Others (supra).
6. In view of the above the present writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment passed in Writ-A No.5311 of 2021, 'Deputy Superintendent of Police Chandra Pal Singh & 5 Others' (supra) the impugned order dated 11.02.2022 is hereby quashed with the directions to take rest increment to the petitioner despite the petitioners have been retired on the 30th June of the calendar year 2020 and the benefits as directed above shall be granted to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 21.2.2024 Mohd. Sharif
2