SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The grievance in the present petition is the refusal of respondents to grant the benefit of one annual increment, which fell due on 30th June to the petitioners, who superannuated on 30th June of their respective years.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly agrees that the issue is squarely covered by several decisions of this Court, which have relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 2471/2023 (The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C. P. Mundinamani and Ors., dtd. 11/04/2023.