Ex Hav Ramawtar Saini vs UOI & Others on 4 August 2025

**O R D E R**

**04.08.2025**

1. 1. While the counsel for the applicant has filed MA Execution No 01/2025 in OA No 469/2022 to comply with the Order dated 28/8/2023 passed by this Tribunal, Respondents have filed Review Application No 10/2025 to review the ibid Order.

2. 2. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.


3. Vide Order dated 28/8/2023, this Tribunal has directed the Respondents to grant one increment on notional basis which was otherwise due a day after his date of retirement in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court cited therein in the Order and the nature of relief granted subject to verification of qualifying service rendered by the applicant. Respondents have filed the Review Application to review the Order passed by this Tribunal on the ground that though the applicant was discharged from service on 30/6/2020, prior to that he was granted MACP on 17/10/2019 as such he has not completed one year from the date of grant of MACP and, therefore, he is not eligible for grant of one increment on notional basis.

कथमेव जयते

4. Refuting the contention of the Respondents, Counsel for the applicant by quoting the reply statement of the office of PAO (OR) EME, Annexure R/3, filed by the Respondents, submits that the applicant is eligible for grant of relief. The reply of the PAO (OR) EME reads, as follows :- *"one year service was not rendered by the PBOR after the date of his last pay fixation, ie, 17/10/2019. Hence, the instant case does not cover under the subject of grant of notional increment to the PBOR who rendered one year of service from the date of last increment. However, had the PBOR been in service, he would have been granted his next increment on 01/7/2020 as he would have rendered six months of service from the date of his last pay fixation on account of grant of MACP".*

यतो ज्येयः सति जयः

5. It is not in dispute that since the applicant was discharged from service on 30/6/2020, he had not completed one year service from the date of last fixation carried out on 17/10/2019 wherein his pay fixation was done in the higher Pay Level by granting increment in the lower pay level on account of MACP benefit and as such the individual is not entitled for the benefit of notional increment.


Moreover, as it is a case for grant of Notional Increment, which was otherwise due after the date of retirement/discharge from service of a PBOR, the basic premise on which such a benefit has been granted is that such an individual had completed one full year of service from the date of last increment but could not be granted to him as was not in service on the date of increment, ie, 01^st Jan or 01^st Jul, as the case may be, having retired a day earlier. This dispensation cannot be brought down to six months to grant the benefit of one notional increment. In this regard, relevant extract of Judgment dated 11/4/2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No 2471 of 2023 (SLP (C) No 6185/2020) in the case of The Director-(Admn & HR) KPTCL Vs CP Mundinamani reads as follows :- XXXX

Pay defined in F.R. 9(21) means the amount drawn monthly by a central government servant and includes the increment. A plain composite reading of applicable provisions leaves no ambiguity that annual increment is given to a government servant to enable him to discharge duties of the post and that pay and allowances are also attached to the post. Article 43 of the CSR defines progressive appointment to mean an appointment wherein the pay is progressive, subject to good behaviour of an officer. It connotes that pay rises, by periodical increments from a minimum to a maximum. The increment in case of progressive appointment is specified in Article 151 of the CSR to mean that increment accrues from the date following that on which it is earned. The scheme, taken cumulatively, clearly suggests that appointment of a central government servant is a progressive appointment and periodical increment in pay from a minimum to maximum is part of the pay structure. Article 151 of CSR contemplates that increment accrues from the day following which it is earned. This increment is not a matter of course but is dependent upon good conduct of the central government servant. It is, therefore, apparent that central government employee earns increment on the basis of his good conduct for specified period i.e. a year in case of annual increment. Increment in pay is thus an integral part of progressive appointment and accrues from the day following which it is earned." (para 23) "Annual increment though is attached to the post & becomes payable on a day following which it is earned but the day on which increment accrues or becomes payable is not conclusive or determinative. In the statutory scheme governing progressive appointment increment becomes due for the services rendered over a year by the government servant subject to his good behaviour. The pay of a central government servant rises, by periodical increments, from a minimum to the maximum in the prescribed scale. The entitlement to receive increment therefore crystallises when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day.

"7. In view of the above and for 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 service preceding one year from the date of retirement with good behaviour and efficiency. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court."

6. Accordingly, in the light of the observation made by the PAO (OR) EME in this matter, we deem it appropriate to remit the case back to the Respondents to reconsider the case for notional increment to the applicant post his discharge from service even when he had not served continuously for a period of one year after his pay had been refixed on promotion or grant of MACP, as the case may be, as the Hon'ble Apex Court Order as far as the qualifying period of one year for earning an Increment on notional basis after retirement/discharge of an individual from Service is concerned, was quite explicit. The Respondents shall take into consideration the observation made by the PAO (OR) and the Order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while taking a final decision in this matter within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The outcome thereof may be intimated to the applicant accordingly.


MA(E) 01/2025 in OA 469/2022 Ex Hav Ramawtar Saini

7. With the above observations, the MA (E) No 01/2025 and the RA No 10/2025 in OA No 469/2022 are disposed off.

8. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

cda/-

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)


यतो न्यायः ततो जयः