1000+ Self Made Questions and Answers have been prepared and posted so for in this site to motivate Postal LDC Exams Aspirants in the form of Quizzes(800+ Questions)/MCQs(200+ Questions)/Matches(400+ Questions)/Can be find in TAG Section.

Header Ads

01/ 02
India Post
02 / 02
India Post

  • Latest Posts

    Supreme Court Order On employee, who retired on 30th June of a year or 31st December of a preceding year, is entitled to be extended the benefit of increment that falls due on 1st July or 1st January of the next year

     In this batch of OAs, the only question that arises for consideration is as to whether an employee, who retired on 30th June of a year or 31st December of a preceding year, is entitled to be extended the benefit of increment that falls due on 1st July or 1st January of the next year, as the case may be.

    While the applicants in some of the cases have retired on 30th June, others retired on 31st December. They were denied the benefit of increment, which was otherwise due to them, only on the ground that by the time the increment became due, they were not in service

    It is true that in Union of India Vs. M. Siddaraj (SLP No. 4722/2021), the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an order 32 OA No. 776/2019 and batch recently on 05.04.2021, directing that the pension shall be granted to the respondents therein on the basis of the last pay drawn as on 30th June, 2014. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that they verified the record and found that the respondents in the said SLP were already extended the benefit of increment, at the last day of their service.

    Be that as it may, once the various benches of the Tribunal, the Hon’ble High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the increment, which became due on 1st July or 1st January as the case may be, needs to be released for the employees, who retired one day earlier thereto, the applicants herein cannot be denied such benefit.

    To protect the interests of the respondents, we direct that in case any different view is taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 4722/2021, the applicants shall be under obligation to refund the benefit that is extended to them. In the corresponding orders, a clause can be incorporated to that effect.

    We make it clear that extension of benefit of increment shall be subject to their fulfilling other conditions under the relevant service rules.

    For the foregoing reasons, the OAs are allowed, directing that: 33 OA No. 776/2019 and batch (a) for such of the employees, who retired on 30th June of any particular year, increment payable on 1st July shall be extended. Their pensions shall also be revised, subject to their fulfilling other conditions which are applicable. The arrears that become due shall be paid without interest; (b) Similarly for employees, who retired on 31st December of a particular year, the increment payable on the 1st January of the next year shall be extended and pension revised, subject to same conditions in the same manner. (c) While extending such benefits, a clause shall be incorporated to the effect that in case the Hon’ble Supreme takes a different view in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No. 4722/2021, they shall be under obligation to refund the entire benefit without any demur. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending MAs shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs


    Like and Share

    Click here to Join Telegram Channel

    No comments

    It's all about friendly conversation here at postalstudy. I'd love to hear your thoughts!
    Be sure to check back again because I do make every effort to reply to your comments here.