Shimla: In a landmark judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the Government of India to grant a notional annual increment to a retired CISF Commandant, settling a long-standing issue that has affected countless retirees.
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua delivered the judgment while hearing a writ petition filed by Kuldip Kumar, aged 71, who had sought this increment for the service rendered during his final year before retirement.
The petitioner retired on June 30, 2013, just a day before the increment was due on July 1, 2013. His plea was based on the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in the Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors., which recognized the entitlement of retiring employees to their earned increments, provided they had served diligently for the preceding year.
Kuldip Kumar’s counsel, Advocate Kameshwer Singh Dhaulta argued that the denial of the increment violated the principle of fairness, as the petitioner had rendered a full year of service from July 1, 2012, to June 30, 2013.
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the government to include the increment in his pension calculations and to release arrears with 10% interest.
The court took note of an interim clarification issued by the Supreme Court on September 6, 2024, which limited the applicability of the 2023 judgment to increments granted after May 1, 2023.
Dhaulta explained, “This judgment addresses a crucial concern for retirees who were denied their due increment on the technical ground that they were no longer in service on the date the increment became payable.
The Supreme Court has already settled this issue, and the High Court’s order further reinforces the rights of such employees.”
The decision is expected to provide relief to numerous retired employees who face similar denials despite fulfilling all necessary conditions for earning the increment.
However, the Government of India has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court, challenging the broader applicability of the 2023 ruling.
This judgment highlights the ongoing legal battles over pension benefits and the need for clarity in policies affecting retired personnel.
