Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2926 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7692 of 2024 Petitioner :- Shankh Dhar Bhatt And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance (General) Anubhag-3 Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Ateeq Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Ateeq Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners were selected and appointed on the post of Sub Inspector (Civil Police) and retired from service on 30.06.2021, 30.06.2018, 30.06.2020, 30.06.2021, 30.06.2015, 30.06.2021, 30.06.2022, 30.06.2022, 30.06.2022 and 30.06.2023, respectively, after attaining age of superannuation. 3. According to the petitioners annual increment were payable to them on the first of the month succeeding their date of superannuation, but the said increment was not paid by the State Government on the ground that on the date when the said increment was payable, the petitioners were not in service and accordingly said benefit was denied to the petitioners. 4. Apart from above, Government Order dated 12.06.2024 was issued wherein even the State Government after reconsidering entire issue has held the persons retiring on 30th June/31st December, would be entitled for increment falling due in next month i.e. 1st July/1st January. It is further stated that financial benefit shall be available to them only prospectively and Government servant would not be entitled to any arrears in this regard. 5. It is next submitted that present controversy was decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL and Others Vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Others, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401. The operative portion of the judgment is quoted herein below :- "21. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the Division Bench of the High Court has rightly directed the appellants to grant one annual increment which the original writ petitioners earned on the last day of their service for rendering their services preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiently. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court. Under the circumstances, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs." 6. Accordingly, the annual increment which has been earned by the petitioners on the last date of their service have rendered service preceding one year from the date of their retirement, would be entitled to the increment falling due on the 1st day of their retirement. 7. The controversy which remains is as to whether the petitioners would be entitled for arrears of the increment or not? 8. This Court has been informed that this aspect of the matter has also been subsequently considered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Others Vs. M. Siddaraj, Misc. Application Diary No. 2400 of 2024 (In Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4722 of 2021, order dated 06.09.2024) wherein the Court has passed following order :- "To prevent any further litigation and confusion, by of an interim order we direct that: (a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the jdgment, that is, the pension by taking into account one increment will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be paid. (b) ……" 9. Aforesaid order of the Apex Court dated 06.09.2024 has subsequently been followed in the case of State of U.P. and Another Vs. Narendra Singh & Others, Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 48241 of 2024, wherein the Apex Court has reiterated the observations passed by the Court in the case of The Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL and Others Vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Others (supra), and held that judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect in the case of third parties from the date of judgment, i.e., the pension by taking into account one increment will be payable on and after 01.05.2023. Enhanced pension for the period prior to 31.04.2023 will not be payable. 10. In the light of above, the controversy in the present case is covered by the judgment and order of Hon'ble Apex Court which are quoted herein above and present writ petition is also partly allowed in terms of the order of the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. and Another Vs. Narendra Singh & Others (supra) and it is provided that the petitioners would be entitled for one increment which falls due on the next date of their superannuation and accordingly, the respondents are directed to revise the pension of the petitioners after taking into account said increment and enhance pension of petitioners payable to them from 01.05.2023 onwards. 11. Accordingly, present writ petition is partly allowed. The respondents are directed to pass necessary orders and pay arrears to the petitioners, expeditiously, say within next two months. Order Date :- 16.1.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench