REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Ratanlal Rathore Appellant

V/S

STATE OF M. P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

WILSON V. COLCHESTER JUSTICES [REFERRED TO]
PENU BALAKRISHNA IYER VS. ARIYA M RAMASWAMI IYER [REFERRED TO]
SHANKAR RAMCHANDRA ABHYANKAR VS. KRISHNAJI DATTATREYA BAPAT [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR SEN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
WORKMEN OF COCHIN PORT TRUST VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE COCHIN PORT TRUST [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RUP DIAMONDS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SUPREME COURT EMPLOYEES WELFARE AS SOCIATION SUPREME COURT FOURTH CLASS EM PLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION S P JAIN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S BANERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JUNIOR TELECOM OFFICERS FORUM VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
YOGENDRA NARAYAN CHOWDHURY GOPAL CHAKRABORTY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. PRABHAKAR BHIKAJI INGLE [REFERRED TO]
NARAYANA DHARMASANGHOM TRUST VS. SWAMI PRAKASANANDA [REFERRED TO]
GOPABANDHU BISWAL VS. KRISHNA CHANDRA MOHANTY [REFERRED TO]
ABBAI MALIGAI PARTNERSHIP FIRM VS. K SANTHAKUMARAN [REFERRED TO]
V M SALGAOCAR AND BROS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF WESTERN INDIA MATCH COMPANY LIMITED VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [REFERRED TO]
JABALPUR BUS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court, who is a retired Government servant, has filed present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that he was appointed on 24/03/1983 and has attained the age of superannuation on 31/06/2016. He has stated that he is entitled for annual increment, which was due from 01/07/2016 even though he was not in service.

(2.) This Court in an identical case of a Government servant, who was also claiming increment w.e.f. 01st July, in the case of Madhavsingh Tomar and Others Vs. M. P. Power Management Co. Ltd. and Others (Writ Petition No.9940/2020 (S), decided on 29/07/2020), has passed the following order:.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued before this Court that in similar circumstances the Madras High Court in the case of P.Ayyamperumal Vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and Others (W.P.No.15732/2017, decided on 15/09/2017) has granted increment, which was due on 01/07/2015 to the employee who superannuated on 30/06/2015. It has been stated that a SLP was dismissed in limine against the aforesaid order and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for same relief.

Click here to view full judgment.

RATANLAL RATHORE Vs. STATE OF M. P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address