IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 205-3 SURENDER SINGH STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON’BLE HON’BLE MR. Present : Mr for the petitioner Mr. Sourabh Mohunta, D.A.G, Haryana. Mr.Shreenath A. Khemka and Mr. Tvesha Gupta, Advocates for ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA 1. The present writ petition is pressed only at the instance of those petitioners who have completed one year of continuous satisfactory service by 30th of June but they have not been them on the next day i 2. The issue in th Hon’ble Supreme Court in and others vs. C.P.Mundinamani and others Review Petition (c) Diary No.36418/2024 filed in the matter also came to be rejected on 18.12.2024. The judgment in C.P.Mundinamani’s case (supra) has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Siddaraj (Civil Appeal No.3933 of 2023). Further clarification was issued by the Supreme Court through an order dated 20 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. Date of decision: SURENDER SINGH AND OTHERS Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Mr. Arshit Goel and Mr. Ajay Sheoran for the petitioners. Mr. Sourabh Mohunta, D.A.G, Haryana. Mr.Shreenath A. Khemka and Mr. Tvesha Gupta, Advocates for respondents No.2 and 3. **** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (oral) The present writ petition is pressed only at the instance of those petitioners who have completed one year of continuous satisfactory service by une but they have not been granted annul increment as fallen due to them on the next day i.e. 1st of July. The issue in this regard stands settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court in The Director (Administration and HR) KPTCL and others vs. C.P.Mundinamani and others Review Petition (c) Diary No.36418/2024 filed in the matter also came to be rejected on 18.12.2024. The judgment in C.P.Mundinamani’s case (supra) has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Union of India &Anr. Vs. M. l Appeal No.3933 of 2023). Further clarification was issued by the Supreme Court through an order dated 20th IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.22493 of 2024 Date of decision: 29.08.2025 …. Petitioners STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …. Respondents ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ROHIT KAPOOR Ajay Sheoran, Advocates Mr. Sourabh Mohunta, D.A.G, Haryana. Mr.Shreenath A. Khemka and Mr. Tvesha Gupta, Advocates The present writ petition is pressed only at the instance of those petitioners who have completed one year of continuous satisfactory service by granted annul increment as fallen due to regard stands settled by the judgment of the The Director (Administration and HR) KPTCL and others vs. C.P.Mundinamani and others, 2023 SCC Online SC 401. Review Petition (c) Diary No.36418/2024 filed in the matter also came to be rejected on 18.12.2024. The judgment in C.P.Mundinamani’s case (supra) has Union of India &Anr. Vs. M. l Appeal No.3933 of 2023). Further clarification was issued by February 2025, while disposing The present writ petition is pressed only at the instance of those petitioners who have completed one year of continuous satisfactory service by granted annul increment as fallen due to regard stands settled by the judgment of the The Director (Administration and HR) KPTCL 023 SCC Online SC 401. Review Petition (c) Diary No.36418/2024 filed in the matter also came to be rejected on 18.12.2024. The judgment in C.P.Mundinamani’s case (supra) has Union of India &Anr. Vs. M. l Appeal No.3933 of 2023). Further clarification was issued by February 2025, while disposing Jyoti 2025.09.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.22493 of 2024 of miscellaneous applications in the reproduced as under: 35783/2024,“35785/2024 and 35786/2024. the operative portion of which reads as under: “(a) of third parties from the date of the judgment, 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. will not be paid. (b) directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment would have to be paid. (c) not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court. (d) intervention/implead other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment was filed.” We are directing that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as final directions. We are, however, of the opinion that Clause (d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires which shall now read as under: intervention/impleadment/writ petition/original application before the Central Administrative 2 Tribunal/High Courts/this Court, the CWP No.22493 of 2024 of miscellaneous applications in the M. Siddaraj’s case reproduced as under: “Miscellaneous Application Diary Nos. 2400/2024, 35783/2024,“35785/2024 and 35786/2024. Delay condoned. We had passed the following interim order dated 06.09.2024, the operative portion of which reads as under: “(a) The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment, 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. will not be paid. (b) For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment would have to be paid. (c) The direction in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court. (d) In case any retired employee has filed any application for intervention/impleadment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment was filed.” We are inclined to dispose of the present miscellaneous applications directing that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as final directions. We are, however, of the opinion that Clause (d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires which shall now read as under: “(d) In case any retired employee filed an application for intervention/impleadment/writ petition/original application before the Central Administrative 2 Tribunal/High Courts/this Court, the -2- Siddaraj’s case (Supra), which is ation Diary Nos. 2400/2024, 35783/2024,“35785/2024 and 35786/2024. We had passed the following interim order dated 06.09.2024, the operative portion of which reads as under: The judgment dated 11.04.2023 will be given effect to in case of third parties from the date of the judgment, 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 For persons who have filed writ petitions and succeeded, the directions given in the said judgment will operate as res judicata, and accordingly, an enhanced pension by taking one increment tion in (b) will not apply, where the judgment has not attained finality, and cases where an appeal has been preferred, or if filed, is entertained by the appellate court. In case any retired employee has filed any application for ment in Civil Appeal No. 3933/2023 or any other writ petition and a beneficial order has been passed, the enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable from the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment inclined to dispose of the present miscellaneous applications directing that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the order dated 06.09.2024 will be treated as final directions. We are, however, of the opinion that Clause (d) of the order dated 06.09.2024 requires modification “(d) In case any retired employee filed an application for intervention/impleadment/writ petition/original application before the Central Administrative 2 Tribunal/High Courts/this Court, the , which is Jyoti 2025.09.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.22493 of 2024 enhanced pension by the period of three years prior to the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment/ writ petition/ original application was filed.” employee who filed a writ petition/original application or an application for intervention before the Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court after the judgment in “Union of India &Anr. v. M. Siddaraj”1, as in such cases, clause (a) will appl disposed of. We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment has already been made, including arrears, such amount paid will not be recovered. It will be open to any person aggrieved by n compliance with the directions and the clarification of this Court, in the present order, to approach the concerned authorities in the first instance and, if required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Court, as per law. applications shall stand disposed of in terms of this order. 38438/2023, 11336/2024 and 20636/2024. that is, M.A. D applications, the present contempt petitions will be treated as disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to appropriate remedies, if required and necessary, as indicated supra. It goes without s cases of the petitioners/ applicants in terms of the order passed today and comply with the same expeditiously. 3. Since the controversy is no more res in settled vide the CWP No.22493 of 2024 enhanced pension by including one increment will be payable for the period of three years prior to the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment/ writ petition/ original application was filed.” Further, clause (d) will not apply to the retired government mployee who filed a writ petition/original application or an application for intervention before the Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court after the judgment in “Union of India &Anr. v. M. Siddaraj”1, as in such cases, clause (a) will apply. Recording the aforesaid, the miscellaneous applications are disposed of. We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment has already been made, including arrears, such amount paid will not be recovered. It will be open to any person aggrieved by n compliance with the directions and the clarification of this Court, in the present order, to approach the concerned authorities in the first instance and, if required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Court, as per law. Pending applications includin applications shall stand disposed of in terms of this order. Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary Nos. 38437/2023, 38438/2023, 11336/2024 and 20636/2024. In view of the order passed today in the connected matters, that is, M.A. Diary No. 2400 OF 2024 and other connected applications, the present contempt petitions will be treated as disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to appropriate remedies, if required and necessary, as indicated supra. It goes without saying that the respondents shall examine the cases of the petitioners/ applicants in terms of the order passed today and comply with the same expeditiously. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.” Since the controversy is no more res in settled vide the judgment in C.P. Mundinamani’s case -3- including one increment will be payable for the period of three years prior to the month in which the application for intervention/ impleadment/ writ petition/ original application Further, clause (d) will not apply to the retired government mployee who filed a writ petition/original application or an application for intervention before the Central Administrative Tribunal/High Courts/this Court after the judgment in “Union of India &Anr. v. M. Siddaraj”1, as in such cases, clause (a) will y. Recording the aforesaid, the miscellaneous applications are We, further, clarify that in case any excess payment has already been made, including arrears, such amount paid will not be recovered. It will be open to any person aggrieved by non- compliance with the directions and the clarification of this Court, in the present order, to approach the concerned authorities in the first instance and, if required, the Administrative Tribunal or High Pending applications including all intervention/impleadment applications shall stand disposed of in terms of this order. Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary Nos. 38437/2023, 38438/2023, 11336/2024 and 20636/2024. In view of the order passed today in the connected matters, iary No. 2400 OF 2024 and other connected applications, the present contempt petitions will be treated as disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to appropriate remedies, if required and necessary, as indicated aying that the respondents shall examine the cases of the petitioners/ applicants in terms of the order passed today and comply with the same expeditiously. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.” Since the controversy is no more res integra and the same stands C.P. Mundinamani’s case (Supra), as such the tegra and the same stands (Supra), as such the Jyoti 2025.09.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.22493 of 2024 petitioners, who completed one year of continuous satisfactory service as on 30th of June, would be entitled to the benefit of annual increment in terms of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani’s case (Supra), as has been clarified in the case of M. Siddaraj’s case (Supra), vide order dated 20.02.2025. The benefits found due in terms of the aforesaid judgment shall be released to the of three months. 4. The petition stands disposed of, accordingly. 5. All pending applications in this case are disposed of accordingly. August 29, 2025 Jyoti-IV CWP No.22493 of 2024 petitioners, who completed one year of continuous satisfactory service as on of June, would be entitled to the benefit of annual increment in terms of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani’s case (Supra), as has been clarified in the case of M. Siddaraj’s case (Supra), vide order dated 20.02.2025. The benefits found due in terms of the aforesaid judgment shall be released to the writ petitioners by the State, within a period of three months. The petition stands disposed of, accordingly. All pending applications in this case are disposed of accordingly. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA (ROHIT KAPOOR , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No -4- petitioners, who completed one year of continuous satisfactory service as on of June, would be entitled to the benefit of annual increment in terms of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani’s case (Supra), as has been clarified in the case of M. Siddaraj’s case (Supra), vide order dated 20.02.2025. The benefits found due in terms of the aforesaid writ petitioners by the State, within a period The petition stands disposed of, accordingly. All pending applications in this case are disposed of accordingly. ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No petitioners, who completed one year of continuous satisfactory service as on of June, would be entitled to the benefit of annual increment in terms of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani’s case (Supra), as has been clarified in the case of M. Siddaraj’s case (Supra), vide order dated 20.02.2025. The benefits found due in terms of the aforesaid writ petitioners by the State, within a period ) Jyoti 2025.09.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document