R.N. Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:59634

¶3

NAFR

¶4

Digitally signed by AVINASH AVINASH SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.12.09 16:38:01 +0530

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 213 of 2020

¶7

R.N. Sharma S/o late Shri J.P. Sharma Aged About 76 Years Retired Assistant Engineer Chief Engineer Office Hasdew Kachar Water Resource Department Bilaspur R/o Naya Sarkanda Jabdapara Thana Sarkanda Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary General Administration Department , Government Employee Welfare Branch Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

2 - Chief Engineer Water Resource Department Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

3 - Secretary Chhattisgarh Government Water Resources Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶13

4 - Divisional Joint Directorate Kosh Lekha And Pension Divisional Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶14

... Respondents.

¶15

For Petitioner	: Shri Abdul Moin Khan appears on behalf of Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocates.
For State/Respondents	: Shri MalayJain, Panel Lawyer.

¶16

2

¶17

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board

¶18

09/12/2025

¶19

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has

¶20

been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶21

10.1 यह कि�, उ्ቈरवादीगण �ो कि�द�शि�त कि�या जावे कि� वे याचि��ा�ता� �े ्ቛ

¶22

ारा ्ቚस्तुत आवेद�प्ቔ परिरशि�्ቖ पी- 02 �ा कि�यमा�ुसार �ी्ቈ कि�रा�रण

¶23

�रें।

¶24

10.2 यह कि� उ्ቈरवादीगण �ो कि�द�शि�त कि�या जावे कि� वे याचि��ा�ता� �ो

¶25

01 ज�वरी 2006 �े ए� वेत�वृ्ቍी �ा लाभ एवं छठवें वेत�मा� �ा लाभ मय एरिरयस� राशि� दे�े कि�यमा�ुसार �ाय�वाही अकिवलंब �रें।

¶26

10.3 यह कि� उ्ቈरवादीगण �ो यह भी कि�द�शि�त कि�या जावे कि� वे याचि��ा�ता� �े पें�� ा कि�቗ኋा�रण भी उ्ሹा�ुसार ए� वेव� वृ्ቍी पर कि�यत वेत�मा� �े आ቗ኋार पर ही �रें।

¶27

10.4 यह कि�, अन्य अ�ुतोष जो मा��ीय न्यायालय उचि�त समझे उ्ቈरवादीगण से याचि�� ो किदलवाया जावे

¶28

At the outset, counsel for the petitioner submits that this Petition may be disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Department with regard to the notional increment to the employees who retire from the services on 30^th June/ 31^st December for the purpose of calculating their pensionary benefits. He would further submit that recently in this regard in the matter of Union of India & Anr. vs. M. Siddaraj

¶29

3

¶30

{Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Civil Appeal No.3933 of 2023 and other connected cases}, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.02.2025 had given various directions and it has been clarified that the benefit of notional increment for pension purposes shall be extended to the officials retiring/retired on 30^th June or 31^st December and if Writ Petition has been filed as per the direction (a) of the order dated 20.02.2025 passed in the matter of M. Siddaraj (supra), such benefit shall be extended and one notional increment will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 (sic 30.04.2023) will not be paid. Hence, counsel for the petitioner submits that in light of the said order, pension of the petitioner may be revised by extending the benefit of fixation of one notional increment for the pensionary benefits.

¶31

Learned State counsel would not oppose the aforesaid legal proposition.

¶32

Having considered the submissions of counsel for the parties and particularly considering that limited relief has been sought by the petitioner, it is expected that the authorities shall reexamine the case of the petitioner in light of the directions given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of M. Siddaraj (supra) with regard to the grant of notional increment for the employees who retired from the services on 30^th June/31st December and if the petitioner files a

¶33

4

¶34

fresh representation within a period of 30 days from the date of passing of this order, the Authorities shall examine the same and take appropriate decision within an outer limit of 120 days from the date of filing of such representation.

¶35

Office of the Advocate General is also directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned Authority for its compliance.

¶36

With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶39

Avinash

R.N. Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.N. Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omkar Prasad Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Virendra Kumar Vs Sangeeta And Anr.

Sita Devi Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bodhiram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raghunandan Prasad Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Rama Dhruw Vs State of Chhattisgarh