Maharashtra: Govt employees who retired day before date of increment get relief

The court had merged the petitions of over 60 state government employees who retired between 2015 and 2021

Giving relief to over 60 state government employees, who retired on June 30 (mostly between 2015 and 2021), a day before their increment and were deprived of their annual increment starting July 1 (as per the sixth pay commission), the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench on February 16, passed an order directing the state chief secretary and principal secretary (finance department) to issue appropriate direction to all departments concerned to grant relief to such employees.

Legal experts say that the order has made it clear that such issues need not reach the court as courts have continually expressed their concern and passed orders to this effect.

Interestingly, this verdict comes at a time when contempt proceeding is pending before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which had passed a similar order in favour of approximately 30 sales tax and public health officials who had retired on June 30, depriving them of the annual increment, while calculating their annual retirement benefits.

mid-day had in an October 25, 2022 article, ‘Health department officials, sales tax commissioner gets contempt notice', written about MAT had ordered them to ensure revised pension was paid to the litigants by October 4, which they failed to do.

Also Read: Mumbai: Fed-up of MahaRERA delays, buyers plan stir

The case

In the recent case, the litigants' petition was that they are entitled to the benefit of increment which was payable and due on the very next day of their retirement. As per the recommendations of the 6th pay commission to have uniformity, every July 1 was fixed for the next increment for all state and Central government employees.

In all these petitions, which were merged by the court, the issue that has been raised is as regards the notional addition of an annual increment, while computing their pension and pensionary benefits. Such increments became due and payable one day after their superannuation.

Court observation

The court observed, "The petitioner has raised a very short issue before us. His (a petitioner's) retirement fell on June 30, 2019, and had he retired on July 1, 2019, he would have been entitled to annual increment as is provided under Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Considering this provision, the Government of Maharashtra revised the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and brought uniformity in the payment of annual increments vide section no 29. There is no dispute that the petitioner had worked up to June 30, 2019. He has thus completed one year prior to his retirement. He would be entitled to an annual increment, but for the fact that the Rules prescribed that he would be entitled to such an increment if he worked on July 1, 2019, when it became payable. The issue raised in this petition has been squarely covered by the judgment delivered by the learned division bench of the Madras high court on September 15, 2017, in the writ petition filed by P Ayyamperumal vs The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal and others."

The order

In their twenty-three-page order, Justices Sanjay Deshmukh and Ravindra Ghuge stated, "We direct the chief secretary and principal secretary (finance department) of Maharashtra to issue appropriate directions to all departments concerned to appeal to such candidates who fall in such category having retired on June 30 of the particular years and who have earned the annual increment on account of performing work for 12 months ending on June 30, to tender their applications to the authorities concerned."

The court further stated, "After such applications are received, the authorities would grant the reliefs as are being granted by the various high courts by restricting the arrears of payments to three years preceding the dates of the applications or preceding the date of actual retirement as per actuals, whichever is less. With these guidelines, the authorities shall not reject a single application if it fits into the parameters of the judgments delivered by this court."

Advocate speaks

Advocate Rajeshwar Panchal said, "I am glad that the honourable high court, Aurangabad Bench, has recently directed the state authorities to consider the representations or applications of all employees who retired on June 30, for a grant of annual increment falling on July 1. The court in its order has made it clear that such issues need not reach the court, as time and again, the courts have expressed their concern and have passed required orders to the said effect."

"In fact, I had expressed the same views when the MAT Mumbai had allowed cases filed by 26 employees through me for the same relief, and as MAT order was not honoured by the departments concerned, I have already filed a contempt proceeding against the errant government servants responsible and the matter is pending before MAT."

He added, "The high court's judgment is in tune with the constitutional guarantee of equality and various judgments of the apex court to the effect that similar benefits should be extended to similarly situated persons without forcing them to come to the court. However, it is sad that authorities never follow such a principle and consequently every employee is forced to litigate in a court of law. I hope that this judgment shall be taken seriously by the authorities concerned."

16
Day in Feb when order was passed