Allowed

Dr Ashok Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2024WRIA/6876/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a writ petition seeking notional increments for nine retired employees. Holding that the law is settled per Supreme Court precedent, the court made an interim mandamus absolute, directing the State to revise post-retirement benefits and pay the increments within six weeks. The State failed to file a counter affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Interim mandamus made absolute directing respondents to pay notional increments and revise post-retirement benefits within six weeks.

Dr Ashok Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:114471

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6876 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr Ashok Kumar Srivastava And 8 Others Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Archana Singh,Bramh Narayan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶6

The petitioners have prayed that a mandamus be issued directing grant of notional increment with effect from 1st of July of the respective years of their retirement. All the petitioners have retired in different years but on the 30th of June on account of which the increment falling due on 1st of July, which they earned working from the 1st of July of previous year to the 30th of June of the year in which they retired, has not been paid to them. This controversy is no longer res integra in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL and others vs. C.P. Mundinamani and others, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 and my own holding in Shri Pal vs. State of U.P. and other, 2024: AHC:66579 . The following order was passed on 30.07.2024 issuing the interim mandamus:

¶7

Order on Writ Petition

¶8

The first petitioner has retired from service on 30.06.2006 and notionally claims increment for the period 01.07.2005 to 30.06.2006 that has fallen due on 01.07.2006. The second petitioner claims notional increment due for the period 01.07.2006 till 30.06.2007 notionally that has fallen due on 01.07.2007. The second petitioner has retired on 01.07.2007. The third petitioner claims notional increment for the period 01.07.2007 to 30.06.2008, the fourth petitioner claims notional increment from 01.07.2008 to 30.06.2009, the fifth petitioner claims increment from 01.07.2008 to 30.06.2009 notionally, the sixth petitioner claims notional

¶9

increment for the period 01.07.2009 to 30.06.2010, the seventh petitioner increment from 01.07.2009 to 30.06.2010 notionally, the eighth petitioner notional increment for the period 01.07.2010 to 30.06.2011 and the 9th petitioner, claims notional increment for the period 01.07.2018 to 30.06.2019. All of them are prima facie entitled to notional increment in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Director (Admn. HR) KPTCL and others vs. C.P. Mundinamani and others, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 and a decision of mine in Shri Pal vs. State of U.P. and others, 2024:AHC:66579.

¶10

Admit.

¶11

Issue notice.

¶12

Notice on behalf of all the respondents is accepted by Mr. Sharad Chandra Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel. He is granted two weeks' time to file a counter affidavit.

¶13

List for orders on 18.07.2024.

¶14

Order on Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 1 of 2024

¶15

Issue notice.

¶16

Let an interim mandamus issue to the Additional Chief Secretary (Labour), Shram Anubhag-6, U.P., Lucknow. the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), U.P., Lucknow, the Director (Pension), U.P., Lucknow and the Director General Employee State Insurance Labour Medical Services Sarvoday Nagar, Kanpur to ensure amongst themselves to ensure payment of notional increment to all the nine petitioners in terms of their claim or show cause by filing a counter affidavit by the next date fixed why this order be not made absolute together with award of exemplary cost for violation of the law declared by the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani (supra).

¶17

List this order be communicated to the Additional Chief Secretary (Labour), Shram Anubhag-6, U.P., Lucknow. the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), U.P., Lucknow, the Director (Pension), U.P., Lucknow and the Director General Employee State Insurance Labour Medical Services Sarvoday Nagar, Kanpur by the Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours.

¶18

Today when the matter was called on despite service of interim mandamus upon the respondents through the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow dated 12.07.2024, there is no return filed on behalf of the respondents answering the interim mandamus.

¶19

The law by now in view of the C.P. Mundinamani (supra) is absolutely settled that an employee, who retires on the 30th of June of a particular year earning the increment from the 1st of July of the previous year, is entitled to grant of notional increment that he would have receive if he were in service on the 1st of July.

¶20

We have already delineated the respective dates of retirement of the nine petitioners and the period of time for which they claim their annual increment on notional basis. This Court is convinced that the respondents have deliberately not answered the interim mandamus issued by us on 03.07.2024 and have nothing to say.

¶21

The action of the respondents in failing to grant notional increment to each of the petitioners in their respective year of retirement notionally due to them on the 1st of July, is contrary to the law declared by the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani, which is binding on all the authorities of the State and the Union under Article 141 of the Constitution. There is no escape from the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The law declared by this Court is also binding on the State Government, so long it is over-ruled by a Larger Bench or the Supreme Court. This Court is also unanimous that increment earned but not actually paid a day earlier on the 30th of June in a particular year to a Government employee becomes notionally payable to him on the basis of which his post retiral benefits have to be reckoned.

¶22

Now that the respondents have nothing to say in the matter, this Court is of opinion that the interim mandamus dated 03.07.2024 deserves to be made absolute in the terms that each of the petitioner would be entitled to the addition of one notional increment to their respective salaries in the year of their retirement and on that basis their post retiral benefits shall be revised and

¶23

paid to them within six weeks of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

This petition is allowed in terms of the aforesaid orders.

¶25

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶26

Let this order be communicated to the Additional Chief Secretary (Labour), Shram Anubhag-6, U.P., Lucknow. the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), U.P., Lucknow, the Director (Pension), U.P., Lucknow and the Director General Employee State Insurance Labour Medical Services Sarvoday Nagar, Kanpur by the Registrar (Compliance) within 48 hours.

¶27

Order Date :- 18.7.2024 Deepak

¶28

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr Ashok Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Ashok Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jawahar Lal Since Deceased and 9 Others vs Ram Kailash and 6 Others

Udaybir Singh and Another vs Vishwas Singh and 4 Others

Habib Ahmad vs State of Up and 3 Others

Yashpal Singh and 15 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt Urmila Joshi vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ramesh Pratap Singh and 12 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others