been earned by working throughout the year, the mere fact that on the date when the increment actually accrues, the employee has retired, cannot deprive him of his notional benefits for the purpose of determining his post retiral entitlement. Still, various State employers doggedly challenged the aforesaid position of the law until it was settled by the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani ( supra ). Now, that it has been settled against the respondents, the State Government have issued the Government Order of 12th June, 2024 in order to deprive the employees full benefit of the judgment of the Supreme Court that would entitle each of them to a revision of their post retiral benefits after adding a notional increment to their salary on the day of retirement and revising their post retiral benefits, which in turn would entitle them to arrears of revised pension. The Government Order dated 12.06.2024 attempts to thwart the claim of arrears. That cannot be done. The law declared by the Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani is declaratory and not constitutive; and, therefore, not prospective. Even if it were made prospective, it would be prospective from the date of the judgment in C.P. Mundinamani and not the Government Order dated 12.06.2024. In any event, that is not the case and the judgment would enure to the benefit of the retiring employees from the date of the first pension due to them after retirement, revised in terms of one notional increment. This would certainly give rise to a valid claim for arrears on account of the revised pension. The Government Order under reference cannot curtail that right by any means and is just to be ignored. We think that the order could not be ignored if before declaration of the law by the Supreme Court in this regard or this Court, which is on the same lines as C.P. Mundinamani , the State Government had come up with a Government Order, conferring this right
