WA/791/2024 of AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA Vs S.SATHISH(DECEASED)1. N.SURESH KUMAR on 9 September 2026

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present intra-court appeal has been instituted by the Airports Authority of India challenging the writ order dated 21.08.2023 passed in W.P.No.5509 of 2014.

2. The respondents filed a writ petition seeking salary as fixed on 21.01.2011 by continuing to pay the two additional increment at the rate of 3% of the basic pay. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition. Thus, the Airports Authority of India filed the present appeal.

3. Mr.Balan Haridas, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1, 2, 4 to 8 would submit that the issues raised in the present appeal are no more res-integra. The High Court of Kerala had considered a similar issue and allowed the claim of the employees in W.A.No.1680 of 2020 on the 1st day of April, 2025. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Kerala High Court reads as under :- “8. Learned Single Bench had taken the assistance of judgments for the purpose of defining the increments. Paragraph Nos.17 and 18 of the judgment under challenge reads as under: “17. In this context it is relevant to note the meaning of increment. A three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in State Bank of India v. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Labour Court [(1972) 3 SCC 595], while interpreting para 292 of the Sastry Award when the computation of benefits due to a Clerk under the same was under challenge held as follows: "An increment is in the same scale while a promotion is from one scale to a higher scale. A promotion from a lower grade to a higher grade though both the grades may be in the same cadre is not an increment or increments by way of special promotion."

18. The Apex Court in the judgment in State of Kerala and Another v. P.V. Neelakandan Nair and Others [(2005) 5 SCC 561], while considering the eligibility of teachers who are continuing after the date of their superannuation till the end of the academic year, by virtue of Rule 62 of Chapter XIV(A) of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 for the benefit of pay revision which comes into effect after the date of their superannuation, when Rule 60(c) of Part I KSR provided that they would not be entitled to any increments or promotion during the extended period, held as follows in para 18: "18.xxxx"Increment" has a definite concept in service laws. It is conceptually different from revision of pay scale. "Increment" is an increase or addition in a fixed scale; it is a regular increase in salary on such a scale. xxxx The pay of an employee is generally fixed with reference to a pay scale. On the other hand, in the case of revision, the pay scale is revised which may incidentally result into increment. Rule 60(c) does not refer to pay revision which is conceptually different from annual increments within the prescribed pay scale. Therefore, entitlement of the teachers concerned for the benefits of pay revision cannot be doubted."

9. Pay scale was revised in 1991 and thereafter in 2001. Respondents – petitioners had joined in 2007. Ext.P5 clarification appears to have been the introduction of change in the mode of calculation of increment from fixed amount in the pay scale, to 3% of revised pay. The expression 'increment' has to be at the rate shown in the scale of pay attached to the post of the employee holding from time to time and has to be calculated in the very same manner in which the increment in the respective pay scale is calculated at the relevant time. The reliance on Clause 3.3 and 3.4 of Ext.P2 pay revision for getting the other benefit of family schemes on the basis of pre- revised scale cannot be a magna carta for the respondents to justify the issuance of Ext.P5. The scheme of granting of additional increments started in 1979 which was discontinued in 2001, but again started in 2004. It was introduced only as incentive to encourage the existing Fireman to obtain Heavy Motor Vehicle license in order to operate the vehicles of particular category. It is a matter of record that the appellants have not denied the continuation of the increments except discontinuation for a limited period from 2001 to 2004.

10. We are of the view that the stand of the appellants was not justified in supporting Ext.P5 as increments have to be at the rate shown in the scale of pay attached to the employee who was holding the post from time to time and rightly so, it has been quashed. We do not find any illegality and perversity warranting interference of judicial review while exercising power of intra court appeal. Writ appeal stands dismissed.”

4. The judgment of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court was taken by way of SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the Supreme Court passed the following orders :- “1. Delay condoned.

2. In view of the decision of this Court in Bhagwan Shukla S/o Sarabjit Shukla Vs. Union of India & Ors., we are of the considered opinion that prior to deciding to take away financial benefits from the respondents, an opportunity of hearing ought to have been given by the petitioner.

3. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court; hence, the special leave petitions stand dismissed.

4. However, the question of law, if any, is kept open.

5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.”

5. The Apex Court left open the question of law, which may be decided in an appropriate case. In view of the above factual position, the claim of the respondents in the present appeal as considered by the writ court deserves to be confirmed. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 09-09-2026 Index: Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sp To

1. The Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, Southern Region, Chennai Airport, Meenambakkam, Chennai – 600 027.

2. The General Manager (HR), Airports Authority of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi – 110 003.

3. The Assistant General Manager (HR), Human Resources Management Department, Airports Authority of India, Chennai Airport, Meenambakkam, Chennai – 600 027.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J. sp WA No.791 of 2024 09-09-2026