AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C. Hari Shankar, J.
The petitioner, who had retired from service of the respondents on 30 June 2019, sought one notional increment w.e.f. 1 July 2019. On the said request not being acceded to, the petitioner instituted OA 2602/2023 before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi1.
The learned Tribunal directed the respondents to take a view in the matter keeping in mind the judgment of the High Court of Madras in WP (C) 15732/2017 and the decision of the Supreme Court in SLP No. 22283/2018.
Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned CGSC for the respondents acknowledges that SLP No. 22283/2018 stands dismissed by the Supreme Court but submits that the respondents have filed a Review Petition vide Diary No.36418/2024 before the Supreme Court in an identical matter. Subject to the outcome of the said Review Petition, he submits that the Department of Personnel & Training2 has, vide Office Memorandum3 dated 14 October 2024, provided thus:
“7.The matter has been examined in consultation with D/o Expenditure and D/o Legal Affairs. It is advised that in pursuance of the Order dated 06.09.2024 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred above, action may be taken to allow the increment on 1st July/1st January to the Central Government employees who retired/are retiring a day before it became due le. on 30th June/31st December and have rendered the requisite qualifying service as on the date of their superannuation with satisfactory work and good conduct for calculating the pension admissible to them. As specifically mentioned in the Orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, grant of the notional increment on 1st January/1st July shall be reckoned only for the purpose of calculating the pension admissible and not for the purpose of calculation of other pensionary benefits..”
In view of para 7 of the OM, Mr. Ravi Prakash acknowledges that the petitioner would be entitled to one notional increment w.e.f. 1 July 2019, as sought by him, but prays that the direction may be made subject to the outcome of Review Petition vide Diary No. 36418/2024.
As such, subject to the outcome of the Review Petition filed before the Supreme Court vide Diary No. 36418/2024, the petitioner is entitled the benefit of para 7 of OM dated 14 October 2014 (supra).
The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Let the petitioner be granted the said benefits within a period of eight weeks from today.