Government Order/Rule Cannot Be Contrary To Holding Of Constitutional Courts: Allahabad HC Orders Municipality To Notionally Grant Pension Increment Post Retirement
The Allahabad High Court ordered Meerut Nagar Ayukt to notionally grant a pension increment to an employee post retirement stating that a government order or rule cannot be contrary to the Constitutional courts of the country.
The High Court reiterated the Supreme Court’s decision in Director (Admn. HR) KPTCL & Ors. v. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors. 2023 SCC OnLine SC 401 where it was held that denying an earned increment based on the technicality of retirement date incongruence is arbitrary and unreasonable. The judgment firmly established the obligation of authorities to grant such increments even post-retirement, in alignment with constitutional principles.
A Single Bench of Justice J.J. Munir observed, “The Nagar Ayukt is not a child or a ward sitting in the Director’s lap seeking directions, as if it were, from his guardian or a parent figure, what to do in the matter. We strongly disapprove of the aforesaid course of action adopted by the Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Meerut and caution him to be careful in future.”
Advocate Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi represented the petitioners, while Advocate Pankaj Srivastava appeared for the respondents.
The petitioner argued that he had a long-standing career marked by diligent service, but he received a notice of retirement. However, despite fulfilling duties until the end of his retirement, the increment for the preceding year remained unpaid.
The Municipality Corporation of Meerut (Nagar Ayukt/Nagar Nigam) had rejected the petitioner's claim stating that as per the regulations, increments were payable only to serving employees and not retired employees.
"Apparently, it seems that the Nagar Ayukt has thought it safer to go by a Government Order and seek instructions from the Government, ignoring judgments of this Court and the Supreme Court. This kind of an impression as well as course of action has to be firmly discouraged and put down," the Court remarked.
“It is in view of the law laid down by the supreme Court in C.P. Mundinamani that this Court required the Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Meerut to file an affidavit of compliance showing cause why the impugned order be not quashed as it decides in the teeth of what their Lordships of the Supreme Court have held in C.P. Mundinamani,” the Court held.
The Court cautioned both the Nagar Ayukt and the State Government against pedantically adhering to Government Orders on matters governed by judgments of the High Court or the Supreme Court, which have deemed such directives arbitrary. The Court noted that the Nagar Ayukt appeared to favour government directives over judicial rulings, disregarding decisions of both the Constitutional Courts.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Shri Pal v. State Of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:66579)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi and Rajesh Kumar Pandey
Respondents: Advocate Pankaj Srivastava