Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

These appeals are filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge who has declined to grant the benefit of the increments which the appellant had earned for a period of three years after promotion.

2. The petitioner was promoted as Assistant Data Processing Officer on 14.7.2006. However, the said promotion was kept in abeyance by an order dated 26.7.2006 as some anomalies were noticed. The petitioner challenged the order keeping his promotion in abeyance before this Court in W.P.No.11735/06. There was an interim order of stay of the order of abeyance on 24.8.2006. By virtue of the stay order, he was permitted to continue in the promoted post. He was also paid the salary attached to the said promoted post. By virtue of the interim order of stay granted by this Court the respondents did not proceed further in the matter to find out the anomaly. In the meanwhile the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.07.2010. After his retirement they have paid all retirement benefits to him. However, in the meanwhile the petitioner had earned four annual increments, out of which first increment was paid whereas the remaining three increments were not paid. Therefore, he preferred W.P.No.33656/10 for a direction to the respondents to pay the said three increments. The learned Single Judge after hearing both the writ petitions together passed a common order declining to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner on the ground that the promotion granted was subject to the pending litigation and if the anomalies exist he would not be entitled to promotion at all and as he was continued in the promotional post by virtue of the interim order granted by this Court and in the meanwhile he had reached the age of superannuation, he is not entitled to the benefit of three increments. Accordingly, both the writ petitions were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.