G RAJUKAR Vs. DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short but interesting point which arises in these petitions is 'whether the petitioners who retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation can claim the benefit of an annual increment, which did not accrue while they were in service?'

(2.) The petitioners are retired employees of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited. Detailed reference to the factual aspect of the service rendered is unnecessary. The relevant service particulars are the following: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_124_LAWS(KAR)4_2017_1.html</FRM>

(3.) The petitioners claim that they having rendered 365 days of continuous service as on the date of their respective retirement are entitled for the benefits of annual increment which became due on the very following day of retirement. The petitioners contend that they are entitled to be sanctioned and paid annual increment for the last year of service rendered. The claim made by 2nd petitioner having been turned down by issuance of an endorsement dated 21.12.2012 vide Annexure-H, all the petitioners being similarly placed, filed these petitions for quashing the said endorsement and for issuing a writ of mandamus against the respondents to grant one annual increment and extend all the monetary benefits.