IMPORTANT JUDGEMENT- OFFICIAL RETIRED ON 30th JUNE IS ELIGIBLE FOR INCREMENT DUE ON 1st JULY NOTIONALLY FOR PENSIONARY BENEFITS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.09.2017
CORAM
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
W.P.No.15732 of 2017
P.Ayyamperumal …
Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Registrar,
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Madras Bench,
High Court Complex,
Chennai-600 105.
2.Union of Indirep.by
the Chairman, CBEC,
North Block,
New Delhi-110 001.
3.Union of India rep.by
Department of Personnel & Training
New Delhi.
4.The Director of General (Inspection),
Customs & Central Excise,
"D" Block, I.P.Bhawan, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi-110 002.
.. Respondents
Petition
filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a
Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first
respondent in O.A./310/00917/2015 dated 21.03.2017 and quash the same
and consequently direct the fourth respondent to treat the retirement
date of the petitioner as on 01.07.2013 and grant all the consequential
benefits including the pensionary benefits.
For Petitioner :: Mr.P.Ayyamperumal,
Petitioner-in-Person
For Respondents :: Mr.K.Mohanamurali,
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by
HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.)
This
writ petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the first
respondent-Tribunal in O.A./310/00917/2015 dated 21.03.2017 and to
consequently direct the fourth respondent to treat the retirement date
of the petitioner as 01.07.2013 and grant him all the consequential
benefits including the pensionary benefits.
2.The case of
the petitioner is that he joined the Indian Revenue Service in Customs
and Excise Department in the year 1982 and retired as Additional
Director General, Chennai on 30.06.2013 on attaining the age of
superannuation. After the Sixth Pay Commission, the Central Government
fixed 1st July as the date of increment for all employees by amending
Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. In view
of the said amendment, the petitioner was denied the last increment,
though he completed a full one year in service, ie., from 01.07.2012 to
30.06.2013. Hence, the petitioner filed the original application in
O.A.No.310/00917/2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras
Bench, and by order dated 21.03.2017, the Tribunal rejected the claim
of the petitioner by taking a view that an incumbent is only entitled to
increment on 1st July if he continued in service on that day. Since the
petitioner was no longer in service on 1st July 2013, he was denied the
relief. Challenging the order passed by the Tribunal, the present writ
petition is filed.
3.The petitioner, appearing as party-in-person,
has referred to the judgment passed by this Court in State of Tamil
Nadu, rep.by its Secretary to Government, Finance Department and others
v.M.Balasubramaniam, reported in CDJ 2012 MHC 6525, wherein the appeal
filed by the State challenging the order passed in the writ petition
entitling the employee who was similarly placed like that of the
petitioner, the benefit of increment on the ground that he has completed
one full year of service from 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2003, was rejected.
Referring to that judgment, the petitioner has submitted that the said
benefit has to be extended to him. He further submitted that even though
the above decision squarely covers his case, no mention has been made
by the Central Administrative Tribunal as to how that decision is not
applicable to him. With regard to the said issue, the petitioner has
also referred to the order passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in
G.O.Ms.No.311, Finance (CMPC) Department, dated 31.12.2014, and
submitted that in the said G.O., it has been mentioned that the Pay
Grievance Redressal Cell has recommended that when the date of increment
of a Government servant falls due on the day following
superannuation on completion of one full year of service, such service
may be considered for the benefit of notional increment purely for the
purpose of pensionary benefits and not for any other purpose. Stating
so, the petitioner prayed for allowing this writ petition.
4.Heard
the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4
on the submissions made by the petitioner and perused the materials
available on record.
5.The petitioner retired as Additional
Director General, Chennai on 30.06.2013 on attaining the age of
superannuation. After the Sixth Pay Commission, the Central Government
fixed 1st July as the date of increment for all employees by amending
Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay)
Rules, 2008. In view
of the said amendment, the petitioner was denied the last increment,
though he completed a full one year in service, ie., from 01.07.2012 to
30.06.2013. Hence,
the petitioner filed the original application
in O.A.No.310/00917/2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Madras Bench, and the same was rejected on the ground that an incumbent
is only entitled to increment on 1st July if he continued in service on
that day.
6.In the case on hand, the petitioner got retired on
30.06.2013. As per the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008,
the increment has to be given only on 01.07.2013, but he had been
superannuated on 30.06.2013 itself. The judgment referred to by the
petitioner in State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary to Government,
Finance Department and others v. M.Balasubramaniam, reported in CDJ 2012
MHC 6525, was passed under similar circumstances on 20.09.2012, wherein
this Court confirmed the order passed in W.P.No.8440 of 2011 allowing
the writ petition filed by the employee, by observing that the employee
had completed one full year of service from 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2003,
which entitled him to the benefit of increment which accrued to him
during that period.
7.The petitioner herein had completed one full
year service as on 30.06.2013, but the increment fell due on
01.07.2013, on which date he was not in service. In view of the above
judgment of this Court, naturally he has to be treated as having
completed one full year of service, though the date of increment falls
on the next day of his retirement. Applying the said judgment to the
present case, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed
by the first respondent-Tribunal dated 21.03.2017 is quashed. The
petitioner shall be given one notional increment for the period from
01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013, as he has completed one full year of service,
though his increment fell on 01.07.2013, for the purpose of pensionary
benefits and not for any other purpose. No costs.
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
(H.G.R.,J.) (T.K.R.,J.)
15.09.2017
KM
To
1.The Registrar,
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Madras Bench, High Court Complex,
Chennai-600 105.
2.The Chairman, CBEC,
Union of India,
North Block,
New Delhi-110 001.
3.Department of Personnel & Training,
Union of India,
New Delhi.
4.The Director of General (Inspection),
Customs & Central Excise,
"D" Block, I.P.Bhawan, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi-110 002.
