Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Completing a Service Year with Good Conduct Cannot be Overlooked: Gujarat High Court Recognizes Right to Increment for Retirees

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a pivotal judgment, the Gujarat High Court, under the guidance of Honourable Mr. Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee, has affirmed the right of government servants to receive an annual increment due on July 1st, even if their retirement falls on June 30th. This decision aligns with the principles established by the Supreme Court and other High Courts, addressing a critical concern for retirees regarding their increments.

Justice Mayee, in his oral order, highlighted the importance of recognizing the service year completed with good conduct by the retirees. He remarked, "The increment is earned for rendering service with good conduct in a year/specified period. Therefore, the moment a government servant has rendered service for a specified period with good conduct, in a time scale, he is entitled to the annual increment."

The case involved the Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti Karmachari Pensioners Mandal against the State of Gujarat, where the petitioners, mostly retirees of June 30th across several years, sought justice for being denied the increment due on the following July 1st.

Drawing upon the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL v. C. P. Mundinamani and Ors., the Gujarat High Court upheld that "the entitlement to receive an increment crystallizes when the government servant completes the requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day."

Following this landmark decision, the Gujarat High Court has directed the concerned authorities to revise the pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioners accordingly. This ruling is a significant stride in acknowledging the rights of government employees to the benefits they have earned through their dedicated service.

Date: 22/01/2024

NAGAR PRATHMIK SHIKSHAN SAMITI KARMACHARI PENSIONERS MANDAL VS STATE OF GUJARAT

 

Latest Legal News